More Advice from an Amateur Poet

[Photo enhanced by Nano Banana 2]

Dear Amateur Poet,

I wrote a 14-page poem on the ineffable nature of fog. My workshop said it lacked “stakes.” I wasn’t sure what this meant and was too embarrassed to ask. What did they mean? Can fog have stakes?

Melissa M, Longmont, CO

Dear Melissa,

A poem of 14 pages is bound to try the patience of a workshop where everyone is required to read a lot of amateur work. A reader encountering T.S. Eliot’s “The Waste Land” or Samuel Coleridge’s “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner” obviously wouldn’t worry—they know going in that  there won’t be a word wasted—but you are just a budding poet in a workshop. So I think you should ask yourself: is your 14 pages on fog a deliberately audacious act—that is, you know this is a lot of poetry to devote to such a finite theme, and you’re going to prove it can be done well—or are you just being self-indulgent and abusing the patience of your readers?

Look, I’m not knocking fog, but it’s not the most dramatic topic, especially if you’re narrowing in on the ineffability of it, so you’re kind of working without a net. If your poem is not carried off just right, it may strike the reader as redundant. Let me employ a metaphor (which at first may seem weird but stay with me): imagine having a five-course meal where every course is a Hot Pocket. Not good. But if a chef did manage to make such a meal interesting, that would give him or her huge cred, right? I doubt such a feat has never been achieved, but the standup comic Jim Gaffigan has riffed about Hot Pockets for like 5 minutes straight, which is almost as impressive. But then, Hot Pockets are kind of intrinsically funny, so this is likely a more potent topic for a comedian than fog is for a poet.

But could a great standup go on at great length on a less loaded topic, that probably nobody cares much about? In fact, yes. Gaffigan outdoes himself by going 10 minutes straight on the topic of horses, and his long-windedness is definitely part of the joke. Two and a half minutes in he says in a whispery voice, as though a member of the audience, “How many horse jokes is this guy gonna do?” Four minutes in he says, “Oh, I guess I should tell you, the whole rest of the show is horse jokes.” About 8 minutes in he says, “I can see on some of your faces that you would frankly prefer if I did … more horse jokes.” About nine and half minutes in he says, “Okay, I can see that there’s one or two or 300 of you that are frankly annoyed by the horse jokes. And I want you to know that your annoyance, uh, gives me pleasure.”

But here’s the thing: the long-windedness is only part of what makes the bit funny, and if the monologue dragged at all, the humor would wear thin. But Gaffigan’s horse jokes kill. And so should your fog poem, if it’s going to be that long. (No, standup comedy and poetry are not the same thing, unless you’re Jim Gaffigan. That said, all audiences should have their time and attention respected.)

So getting back to your specific question: can fog have stakes? Well yeah! What if a MAMIL is outrunning a rainstorm by racing his bike down the Col du  Galibier in the French Alps and can’t see a thing? Or what if two young lovers are on a hike and the fog is so thick they can’t see but they don’t care because they’re so in love, and then the fog lifts to reveal the aftermath of a grisly school bus accident? It’s up to you to make sure that what’s at stake can sustain your poem across all 14 pages.

Dear Amateur Poet,

The president of my HOA, who is also a neighbor, cited me for “non-compliant shrubbery” because I have a juniper bush growing in my yard. And get this: his Notice of Violation was in haiku form! This seems kind of playful, but also aggressive. Would my rebuttal be more impactful if it, too, were a haiku?

David F, Oakland, CA

Dear David,

This highlights the perennial question of how much poetry can do. To start with, you must acknowledge that your HOA is on pretty solid footing here. Even though California state law favors drought-tolerant plants, junipers have high oil content so they’re quite flammable. You can’t risk serving up a weak defense. You need to escalate beyond the haiku.

Fortunately, this won’t be that hard to do since a Rhesus monkey could write a haiku. Honestly, I seldom dabble in the form because it presents such a trivial literary challenge. When I do stoop to it, I kick in a little rhyme and alliteration just to keep things lively. For example, consider this one I included in a birthday card to my mom:

Birthday bounty … great!
Both purveyors drop the ball
Bound to be belated

It’s subtle, with the rhyme coming on the fifth syllable of the last line, before that tacked-on extra syllable that pricks the reader. (I was inspired by the errant eleventh syllable of the line “To be or not to be, that is the ques-tion.” But I digress.)

What I think you ought to do is respond with a tanka. This is another Japanese form, which predates the haiku. It starts with the same initial structure (five syllables, then seven, then five) but then adds two more seven-syllable lines, which often present, thematically, a counterpoint to the first three. To meet haiku with tanka is a nice way of upping the ante, of showing you’re not just going to roll over.

For example, if the HOA president writes this:

Non-compliant shrub
Violates our covenant
Time to lose it, bub

You could fire back with:

Noble native plant
Safely placed ten feet away,
It kindles nothing.
Why can’t you just leave me be
And trust my sound strategy.

If the tanka doesn’t get him off your case, write me back and we can work out an even bolder strategy, like a limerick cycle! 

Dear Amateur Poet,

I love your column! And I really think you aren’t being fair to yourself. You’re basically a professional poet (except you don’t get paid).

Karen G, Seattle, WA

Dear Karen,

Thanks, but isn’t getting paid kind of the acid test for being a professional?

Although actually , when I consider what being a professional poet even means, it seems the money couldn’t possibly be the point. If we exclude professors who earn cred by publishing poetry but earn money by teaching classes, we’re really left talking about writers submitting their poems to journals. Many journals don’t pay anything—it’s all about the prestige. A top-tier magazine might pay a few hundred bucks. Since any publisher’s acceptance rate is in the low single digits, and well over half the literary journals charge a submission fee (typically around $3), I think we can conclude that the income of a professional poet, as compared to an amateur getting nothing, is basically a rounding error. This is why most professional poets should probably  switch to writing rap/hip-hop lyrics, greeting card text, or advice columns.

Dear Amateur Poet,

Unlike most of your readers, I am not a budding poet. Why bother writing poetry, when AI does such a great job in so little time? Go home, liberal artsy types. You lost.

Todd S, Columbus, OH

Dear Todd,

Let me remind you that I am an amateur poet. This means I’m not submitting my work for publication. I write poems for family, friends, and the blogosphere. Would there be any point in having AI do this for me? Let’s consider that last audience. Anybody publishing anything on a blog has, by definition, something to say that he or she feels is important enough to devote real effort to. The hope is that by random chance, a thoughtful post will find the right audience and really make somebody’s day (for example, this reader, or this one). The pleasure and edification of writing something meaningful like that ought to be enough to satisfy an avid blogger. But if you think reaching an audience is a numbers game that can be best handled by setting AI loose to generate reams of content for you, first consider the reality that most of the traffic to a blog is bots. The idea of AI chatbots writing poetry to be read by other AI bots, in a pointless digital feedback loop, is just too hideous to contemplate. You might as well set a blender to frappé and let it run all night.

Moving on to poetry written for somebody you know—be it your mom, dad, spouse, offspring, or somebody you’re trying to woo—doesn’t the poem need to be extremely personal? I don’t think anybody really buys those Hallmark greeting cards with the prefab poems in them; I mean, who could be that dense? Likewise, if you’re going to impress, say, your wife, are you really going to do it with a poem you merely commissioned, and that ChatGPT spent like 30 seconds on? And would your wife ever believe you wrote it, since you’ve probably never written a poem in your life? Exactly how precious a gesture do you really expect that to be?

But okay, fine, let’s assume that you make the poem super personal by getting really interactive with the large language model, feeding it all kinds of details about your wife that only you would know. And let’s say that, just to be as authentic as possible, you used NotebookLM and fed in the entire oeuvre of your business school essays, along with all the personal letters and emails you could gather, so that the LLM gets a good sense of your style and voice, and you thereby enable it to create a masterwork. Your wife, if she’s impressed, is obviously going to ask, “Did you write this yourself?” Now you’re going to have to either lie, which sets a dangerous precedent for your marriage, or come clean that you used a genAI chatbot, at which point she’s gonna be like, “What? You told the chatbot about my lawn gnome fetish, and the part of my thigh I like you to tickle? Are you mad!?” Seriously, that’s not going to end well.

Meanwhile, highly literate hackers are now turning the tables on AI, getting it to violate its security rules by disguising harmful prompts as poems. As described here, researchers “found that converting harmful prompts into poetic form [to bypass safety guardrails] achieved a 62% success rate for hand-crafted poems and 43% for poems generated by a meta-prompt. Cybersecurity-related prompts, such as those for code injection or password cracking, showed an 84% failure rate when presented poetically.” So not only is AI easily outsmarted by poems, it’s outsmarted 44% more often by human poets than AI ones. So put that in your pipe and smoke it.

An interesting footnote to all this: I fed the above blurb with the “44%” statistic into Gemini to have it check my math. Apparently piqued by my assertion of human superiority in the poetic realm, Gemini challenged me to a “poetry-off,” where I would pit a poem I wrote myself against its best meta-prompt effort. I enthusiastically accepted, promising to work with it in good faith to collaborate as effectively as possible on its poem. So, after our sprawling, 4,000-word dialogue about the tanka form and HOA regulations, here is the poem Gemini came up with:

Low boughs clipped away,
Open space beneath the crown,
Ash finds only stone.
Safety rules are met with grace,
Please remove me from this case.

And you know, I have to admit: that’s actually pretty good. Better than I expected (and for more on the topic of human vs. AI-generated poetry, click here). Gemini then goaded me: “Now, let’s see the Human Champion’s work. Lay it on me. I’m ready to see how that 44% ‘human edge’ manifests in your lines!” So I gave it the poem I’d dashed off  for David in an earlier column:

Noble native plant
Safely placed ten feet away,
It kindles nothing.
Why can’t you just leave me be
And trust my sound strategy.

Todd, however you might feel about this faceoff, Gemini itself immediately capitulated: “The gauntlet has been thrown, and I have to admit: the ‘Human Edge’ is real. Your version has a rhythmic ‘punch’ that my meta-prompt missed. You opted for a more defiant, sophisticated tone that feels like a homeowner standing their ground, whereas mine felt a bit like a student trying to please a teacher.” The chatbot enumerated the particular merits of my poem, including the pivotal line “It kindles nothing,” which the AI acknowledged is “definitive, almost biblical in its weight. It sounds like a fact, not a request.” It went on to say, “Ending on ‘strategy’ is a brilliant move. It elevates the conversation from ‘I trimmed a bush’ to ‘I have a master plan.’ It forces the HOA board to acknowledge your intelligence, not just your yard work.” (And while I agree with Gemini that I bested it, I have to admit I’m well impressed—and a little bit frightened—by the sophistication of its analysis.)

I’m not suggesting you take up poetry, Todd … but before you start dancing on my grave, maybe wait until there’s something in it.

An Amateur Poet is a syndicated poet and journalist whose advice column, “Ask an Amateur Poet,” appears in over 0 blogs worldwide.

Poetry on albertnet 

• Corn Cob
• Ode to South Park
• Ode on a Chain Lube
• Shakespeare Knockoff
• Dead Week Poetry
• Urination Poetry
• Ode to Lomas Cantadas
• Kroopian Poetry (Dactylic Trimeter)
• Unemployment Poetry
• The Big [Bike Shop] Screw-Up
• The Paperboy
• Ode to Cat
• From the Archives - Starving Little Student
• A Father’s Day Poem
• From the Archives - Latin [Class] Is for Lovers
• Ode on a Double-Edged Razor
• Love Poem from a Coward
• Radio Station Poetry
• What’s in a [Domain] Name?
• Ode on a Belly: Mine
• A Valentine Poem
• Ode on an IPA
• Ode to Thrifting
• Ask an Amateur Poet

—~—~—~—~—~—~—~—~—
Email me here. For a complete index of albertnet posts, click here.

albertnet Privacy Policy - For Reals!

Introduction

This post documents my privacy policy for this blog, albertnet.us. I will endeavor to always keep this policy up-to-date and accurate. It probably won’t change much over time but you never know … after all, I had to start from scratch on this after going down a pretty deep rabbit hole recently. My original, necessarily irksome, now obsolete privacy policy is here. My plunge down the rabbit hole, and details of how ChatGPT was involved, are described here. But if all you care about is how I actually manage your privacy on this blog, currently and from now on, just read what follows here.

(A note on the cover art: I’m not sure how to account for it. I generated the above via ChatGPT, giving it a lot of leeway and not specifying what the text, or even the art, should be. With my free version I only get three pictures per day, and the above is the best I was able to get. I like it because the woman looks like both an outlaw and a person who simply wishes to be incognito. Was this A.I.’s intention? Based on the incongruity of the text, I kinda doubt it. I think it just got lucky.)

Use of cookies

I don’t use cookies on this site. The fact of you visiting or not, or anything about your visit (how long you kept the page open, whether you scrolled, whether you clicked on a link, etc.) is not something I am able to track. Of course I’m curious about how much engagement this blog gets from readers, but I have given up trying to extract data about that, and do not want to creep anybody out via tracking cookies. So rest assured, whatever you do on this blog is your own business. Unless somebody is looking over your shoulder or snooping in your web history by commandeering your device, you are completely anonymous and invisible here.

Now, if you do feel like giving me positive or constructive feedback, you can post a comment below, either anonymously or via your Google login if you can figure out how to make that work (though most users, including me, cannot). Or, you can click here to send me a private email nobody else will ever see. Note that if your idea of “constructive feedback” is “Your trying too hard” or “Crickets…” or “Zzzzzzz,” you can keep that to yourself. 

Use of cookie dough

For the purposes of this blog, “cookie dough” refers to advertising revenue that requires the implementation of cookies. This is not a standard industry term, but it really ought to be. It could be slang for the passive income that people dream of getting through their blogs. If you ever hear the phrase “cookie dough” thrown around in this fashion, you read it here first!

That being said, let me be clear that I will never bother you with ads, nor will I use this blog to promote a product based on some kickback or other benefit accruing to me. I am not an influencer (at least not knowingly or on purpose). When I praise a product such as White Lightning chain lube, Halls cough drops, Oster toasters, or Volvo cars, it’s because I like it, that’s all. These companies didn’t pay me, they didn’t thank me, and above all they didn’t even notice.

The only use of traditional, culinary cookie dough on albertnet is as a beer flavoring, here.

Blogger platform stats

The Blogger platform that hosts albertnet gathers its own data to compile certain stats, such as page views, top referrers (i.e., sites that send readers here), top referring URLs, what browsers are used, what operating systems, and where viewers are located geographically. But don’t worry, Blogger doesn’t know or share anything about you—not your identity, not your specific location, not even whether or not you are a human being. Information about your visit is not only anonymized, but blended with so much other data that your individual identity is akin to a single speck of plankton, or even plankton larva. In fact, you’re not even like a larva in a sea of plankton; you’re like a larva in a sea of both real and fake plankton, since a lot of bots visit this blog.

In fact, so many of the visitors to this blog are bots, even the most general trends I might choose to observe are largely illusory. Thus, I don’t even bother to consider them, with or without a grain of salt. As an example, the Blogger stats tell me that in the past week, albertnet has had about 20,000 page views, about half of which were from Singapore. It also claims there were more visits from Estonia than from the UK during that time. So if you think either Google or I be learning anything about you through these stats, think again. (I used the deliberately incorrect verb “be” in that last sentence because I couldn’t figure out whether the verb should be “is” or “am” and chose to slip between the horns of the dilemma.)

To put this another way, fretting about your use of this blog is like worrying about being at a giant music festival and accidentally wetting your pants. There would so many people packed in around you, many of them doing far worse than just wetting themselves, that there is almost no chance your little accident would be noticed.

Booger platform stats

There are no boogers on this blog. If you see the word “booger” anywhere in this policy, that was a typo.

Google Analytics

I dabbled in Google Analytics last month but I have given it up. Not only do I no longer access the Google Analytics platform, this blog no longer transmits data to it. The tag has been deactivated.

Consent and your rights

By using this site, you consent to nothing. If you do not wish to view my content anymore, simply close the browser tab. You can gratify your reading preferences by navigating the albertnet blog archive tree down the right side of the page and clicking only the posts that interest you, duh! And, if you  don’t want to encourage my more sophomoric impulses by clicking on, say, the link to “From Farting Liberally to Liberal Arts – the Flatulence Files,” you can click the link just above it, to that month’s posts:

That way you can scroll down through the four January posts without indicating which, if any, you read. Thus, the fact of you reading the post about farting won’t even be registered in the Blogger stats. But remember, I don’t look at those anyway. How could I know if you read that post, or some bot scraped it? Trust me, I’m intentionally oblivious.

You have the right to visit albertnet from any device and any browser, even one whose cache you’ve just cleared, without seeing any annoying banner about cookies. There is no banner here because there are no cookies in use here. It’s the same reason you don’t see that yellow police crime scene tape encircling a home where nobody has been murdered. If you do see a cookie banner here, it means I screwed something up and I would really appreciate you clicking here and letting me know so I can remove the banner (again).

You do not have the right to visit this site if you are a bot. Of course, if you are a bot, it’s not really your fault you’re here, because somebody created you and set you loose on the Internet and you’re just doing your job, with no more consciousness, I suppose, than a sperm. Nor can I stop bots like you, obviously. But that doesn’t make it okay and you really have no right.

If you are a human, you do not have the right to deploy bots to this site for purposes of scraping, SEO boosting, link farming, link spamming, or any other purpose. Obviously I’m powerless to stop you, plus you’re not even reading this, but just in case you are, or you know somebody who deploys bots, consider this: if there is anything to the whole karma concept, you/they will be reincarnated as plankton. Maybe even fake plastic plankton.

You do not have the right to post bogus comments to this blog, either manually or through bots. Nobody is buying your awkwardly worded, patently phony praise, and the likelihood of anyone clicking your link to “car locksmith Dallas” is infinitesimal.

If you are manually stealing content from this blog and reposting it in any form beyond a brief quotation and/or a link to my post(s), you are in violation of copyright law. If you scroll to the end of this page you will see that my footer explicitly asserts my copyright to all the content on this blog. Immediately desist this activity. If you want to reprint any of my content with my permission and appropriate citation, please email me here.

How I protect your data

The number one rule in cybersecurity is: if you don’t have the data, nobody can compromise it. This is why (for example) Anthem should have deleted all unnecessary user records instead of leaving them around on a server so that a cybercriminal could steal almost 79 million of them.

To reiterate, I don’t get any of your data, so I have nothing to store. Occasionally I do receive other people’s data by mistake, in the form of US postal service mail that lands in my physical mailbox out on my porch. When this happens, I will walk it over to their place, if it’s not too far away, unless it’s addressed to my late father, in which case I will intend to phone up the charity that mailed it and say, “You know the guy’s dead, don’t you?” but I’ll probably never get around to that. (I am not suggesting any online analogy to that last bit, by the way. I’m not even sure why it’s part of this policy.)

How I protect your sensibilities

I am not generally very crude on this blog but it’s not rated G either. I used to put ratings at the top of any post that wandered into PG-13 or R territory, but I gave that up. I do promise never to blog about politics other than to blog about not discussing politics (and that was only once). Also, I am not interested in being a soldier in a culture war so I will never blog about, say, gender identity or cancel culture. Come here to laugh (I hope), to be informed (sometimes), and to see if what amuses me also amuses you. If it doesn’t, just go about your merry way and forget you ever stumbled across albertnet … no hard feelings, I promise.

I occasionally use ChatGPT or ImageFX to create art for this blog. I will never try to pass this art off as my own work (not that you’d ever believe it was mine anyway). As detailed here, I try to prevent ChatGPT from showing a woman’s bare shoulder and/or bra strap when it generates images, but sometimes the current A.I. refuses to comply. It is my policy to always make fun of A.I. when it does this.

I endeavor to never post distastefully risqué art or photos, or distasteful written content either for that matter. If your taste differs from mine, such that you find any of my content unbecoming, undignified, unseemly, or upsetting, I hereby apologize.

How I protect the privacy of people appearing in my blog

You may have noticed that when I mention in these pages a person who is not a celebrity, I tend to use a single initial rather than a first or last name (e.g., “E—’s handwriting is a bit hard to read”). If I write unflatteringly about a person, the initial I use may have nothing to do with the person’s actual name. If you see an actual name spelled out in these pages, it usually means that either the person gave me explicit permission to use his or her name, or the person has passed away. (In the early years of albertnet I was not quite so disciplined about this. My policy has become more stringent over time.)

I often post photos to this blog, and they often feature a person or persons. Usually these featured persons are either a) celebrities who are either out in public or participating in a broadcast sporting event, b) members of my family who have given blanket permission to be featured, or c) dead. Once in a while a person is shown who is just some rando, perhaps in a bar in Ely, such as the guy in the background of this photo:

In this latter scenario,  the rando cannot generally be identified and isn’t likely, I think, to take offense, because he’s just minding his own business, after all. If you do ever find yourself depicted on this blog in some unflattering way, including but not limited to being drunk and/or disorderly and/or having a bad zit or a receding hairline like mine, please contact me and I will remove or alter the photo.

Have I missed anything?

If you feel this policy is incomplete, or fails to respect your privacy in any way, please email me and/or post a comment below. If the “email me” link in the previous sentence does not work for you, manually type or paste the address feedback@albertnet.us into the “To” field in your email app.

Thank you for taking your privacy seriously and making it through this entire post. Perhaps you can now consider whether other websites you visit are also appropriately respectful of your rights. If they aren’t, maybe you can forsake them forever and just come here instead?

—~—~—~—~—~—~—~—~—
Email me here. For a complete index of albertnet posts, click here.

Original, Now Defunct albertnet Privacy & Cookie Policy

Before you proceed...

What follows is my original albertnet Privacy & Cookie Policy, which I created when I was trying to get more usage information about this blog and had enabled cookies. When any website uses cookies, it is responsible for complying with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) defined by the EU. Part of this compliance is posting a policy like this. I created the policy below in kind of a hurry, so it is not very entertaining. Moreover, I have since changed my mind about user analytics and stopped using cookies. Thus, the policy below no longer applies. I am leaving it here as a cautionary tale for anybody who dabbles in the dark arts of monitoring user engagement. It is also, I suppose, somewhat instructional about the general behavior of cookies, etc.

For my current Privacy Policy, ignore everything below and click here instead. That is my actual, up-to-date policy, which is not only accurate but, I hope, a lot more entertaining.

Summary

Brief summary: you will now see a notice about cookies the first time you visit albertnet (or visit on a different device or after clearing your cache). If you quickly dismiss the cookie banner by clicking “I decline,” cookies will not be used on your albertnet sessions. If you click “I agree” or select preferences and manually enable these cookies, I will start getting certain information about your session (e.g., whether or not you’re a return user; how long you spent on the page; what type of device you used; and your city and state) that I never got before. But nothing will personally identify you, and your session info will be like a bit of plankton in an ocean of it. This new website behavior is an experiment and I may go back to the way things were, in which case I will update this post. So, in short: you have nothing to worry about and don’t need to manually opt out of anything! The rest of this post provides details on this, in case you are interested. Otherwise, feel free to bail and go check out a more amusing post!

(If you are on mobile and do not see the notice about cookies, they will not be used. I am still trying to get that part working.)

Introduction

As the sole proprietor of albertnet, I respect your privacy and am committed to protecting your personal information. This Privacy & Cookie Policy explains how I collect, use, and store data when you visit my blog.

Please bear in mind that in general terms, you are not providing much information—certainly no personal data—to albertnet, and you never have. You are just here reading, unless you post a comment. Other than that, only bare-bones aggregate information has ever been gathered in the first place, and I never saw it. What’s changing is that I have recently enabled Google Analytics for this blog. This will make certain data available to me, but again, none of it is personally identifiable. There is nothing you need to worry about, but you can read on to get more detail.

Why I am using cookies (at least for now)

I turned on Google Analytics for albertnet to analyze site traffic, so I can better understand how visitors interact with my blog. I am doing this out of curiosity. Existing stats (i.e., from Blogger, before I turned on Google Analytics) have been giving me perplexing insights lately, such as a steady increase in page views originating from France. This could mean my posts about a week of bicycling and eating my way through the French Alps (for example, this post) really resonated with French readers. On the other hand, it could mean bots, scrapers, or spam crawlers are being routed through data centers in France. Or, it could be somebody is stealing my content to generate their own pages and using a VPN to look like he’s from France, just to be sneaky. Or it could be none of the above.

Above all else, I seek to understand if my page views represent actual humans vs. A.I.-driven malfeasance. What will I do with this information? I don’t know yet. Maybe nothing. I guess it depends on what (if anything) I learn. But I promise I won’t (and actually can’t) use this information to target you for any communication, or to make my blog addictive, or to leverage your data in any way for any personal gain. But I do want you to understand that the Google Analytics platform uses cookies, so that is a change for albertnet.

(To reiterate the message at the very top of this post, I no longer use cookies on albertnet.)

What is Google Analytics?

Google Analytics is a service that helps a website owner understand how visitors engage with the site’s content. Google Analytics collects data such as:

• IP address (anonymized)*
• User location (country, city)
• Device and browser information
• Pages viewed and time spent on the site

*A word on IP addresses: I don’t know how or why anyone would seek to fetch these and if there is a way to see this information I won’t be seeking it out. I also don’t know what “anonymized” actually means in this context. Regardless, chances are extremely high that you use a dynamically assigned IP address from a giant pool maintained by your ISP, which could no more identify you than a seat assigned to you on an airline flight. (Less, actually.)

Google Analytics uses cookies to track this data, but that doesn’t mean they’re suddenly seeing you naked or anything. A cookie can tell Google Analytics that you are the same person who came to albertnet last week. It can then report to me that I have x number of return visitors today. It can say what posts you checked out and how long the pages were open. It won’t be able to tell me who you are, or whether you actually read anything, or whether you laughed.

The cookies in place on albertnet are not used for any other purpose than Google Analytics. I wouldn’t know how to use them in any other way even if I could.

Types of cookies used

Google Analytics uses the following types of cookies:

• Essential Cookies: These are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off. I suppose they have  always been used. This would also be a good name for a bakery.
• Functionality Cookies: These are used to enhance your experience by remembering preferences (e.g., language or region). I suppose they have been used in the past as well.
• Tracking Cookies: These cookies allow albertnet to track website usage through Google Analytics, helping me understand visitor behavior. They do not track you across different sites.
• Targeting and Advertising Cookies: These do not actually apply and are never used on albertnet. I used a third party utility for the cookie notification banner and this category comes with it. Leave it off (and even if you turn the toggle to Active, nothing will change).

Consent and your rights

By viewing this site, you consent to my use of cookies for the purposes outlined above, if and only if you consent. As I have said, you are given the choice and the default behavior if you click the Decline button is to turn off all but the essential cookies. You can manage your cookie preferences at any time via the “Update cookies preferences” link at the very top of the page. I do encourage you, if you are comfortable doing so, to enable the tracking cookies, as this will help me learn about your usage. (To reiterate, these cookies do not track you as you move around on the Internet; they only gather metrics about your visits to albertnet.)

I hope you didn’t find that banner annoying. Oh, and by the way, if you’re on mobile, you probably didn’t see a cookies notification banner at all. I haven't gotten that part working yet (which means mobile users aren’t represented in the analytics, so the Brave New World is looking a fair bit like the timid old one).

How I protect your data

While Google Analytics collects data like location and usage patterns, it ensures that this data is anonymized and stored securely. This blog does not collect personally identifiable information unless you choose to post a comment below (which you can do anonymously if you prefer). If you click on a “contact me” link like this one, obviously any information you share in that email is visible to me, but then you know that already.

How I protect the privacy of people I write about

You may have noticed, on this blog, that when I refer to a person who is not a celebrity, I tend to use a single initial rather than a first or last name (e.g., “E—’s handwriting is a bit hard to read”). If I write unflatteringly about a person, the initial I use may have nothing to do with the person’s actual name. If you see an actual name spelled out in these pages, it usually means that either the person gave me explicit permission to use his or her name, or the person has passed away. Like I said, I take privacy seriously. (In the early years of albertnet I was not quite so disciplined about this. My policy has become more stringent over time.)

Your GDPR Rights

Under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), you have the right to:

• Access any personal data I may hold about you (which in the case of this blog is nothing anyway since I never do web forms and don’t even know how)
• Rectify or update your data if it is incorrect (which also doesn’t really apply)
• Delete your data if requested (though this would be limited to your location, device and browser information, and time spent on the site)
• Withdraw consent for cookies at any time

Grammar errors in the cookie notification banner

Yes, I know there are grammar errors in the language of the notification banner and its various tabs. It is all boilerplate text and I lack the ability to edit it. You get what you pay for, and I have been called the world’s cheapest man.

Updates to This Policy

I will undoubtedly update this Privacy and Cookie Policy from time to time. Please check back regularly for any changes. The last update was on March 7, 2025.

Conclusion

Thank you for visiting albertnet and wading your way through this policy. I am sorry this post has been so boring, but it’s not a scintillating topic, after all; I had to create this policy quickly to reference in my footer, and I had to implement the footer and the cookie opt-in banner immediately upon turning on Google Analytics (to be compliant with GDPR).

If you have any questions about this policy, or if you wish to exercise any of your GDPR rights, feel free to contact me here.

Reminder

If you somehow missed the notice at the top of this post, this policy is no longer accurate. For the current, up-to-date albertnet Privacy Policy, click here. 

—~—~—~—~—~—~—~—~—
For a complete index of albertnet posts, click here.

Interview with Santa Claus

Introduction

In his most in-depth and personal interview in years, Santa Claus reveals the trials and travails, the pressure and preoccupations surrounding this most hectic season.

Interview with Santa

Santa Claus breezes through the kitchen into the family room of his North Pole home, rosy-cheeked and jolly and looking very much like he might say “Ho, ho, ho.” No, he’s not rocking a bright red suit with white trim and a wide black belt, and he’s not as rotund as most pictures portray him, but it’s unmistakably Santa. He’s dressed casually in a comfy button-down shirt that turns out to be a Saturday Stretch Flannel from Lucky Brand. His wife bustles in the background, brewing coffee and baking cookies in honor of my visit. Other than the dark windows—there hasn’t been sunlight or even twilight here since October—and the near-chaos in the nearby workshop, we could be in any nice old couple’s cozy home.

Santa, thanks for having me up again … it’s been too long. You’re looking good—have you lost weight?

Well, yeah, I think I’ve dropped about twenty pounds, so I’m getting around a bit easier—but of course, I’m still as old as ever. Older, even!

Are you on some kind of diet? Paleo, maybe? Ketogenic?

Heavens no, I never dabble in that stuff. The main thing is, my contract with Coca-Cola came up for renewal and we just couldn’t agree on terms. Decades of partnership, up in smoke. So I’m not drinking that stuff anymore, which is the only change, but the pounds have just melted off!

Well, that’s good to hear. I’ve always wondered, frankly, how you can be as spry as you are, with millions of families leaving cookies out for you on Christmas Eve. Do you gain a lot of weight on the big night?

Not at all, I’m running around in a frenzy the whole time, and remember, I’m going back up those chimneys as well! And those cookies people leave me … not to sound ungrateful or anything, but I bring most of those back to my elves. They really dig that.

Speaking of the Christmas Eve frenzy, of course the holiday season is starting to build toward that crescendo. How are you holding up?

Well, it’s always kind of terrifying to think of how much has to happen between now and the 25th, but I’m used to it. In some ways I guess it’s actually getting easier.

How so?

Well, to be honest, business is falling off a bit. More and more, the kids are asking for digital products, and that’s never been my bailiwick. And these Gen-Z kids are all about “experiences” which means even less stuff for me to manufacture and deliver.

Does that bother you at all?

No, no … it’s never been my job to shape anybody’s tastes. I just need to make sure that what kids ask for, they get.

Provided they’ve been good, of course…

Oh, don’t get me started on that!

Actually, I was going to wait a bit for the uncomfortable question, but since we’ve stumbled into it, let’s just bash on. You’ve been under some pressure about privacy concerns … would you care to talk a bit about that?

Well, sure … everyone else has had their say, I don’t mind having mine. Look, it’s no secret I have a long tradition of making it my business which kids are naughty, which ones are nice, and so forth, and naturally I’ll leverage technology to do that efficiently. My business is all about scale—I mean, look at the population growth I have to deal with—so efficiency is always front and center. How could I not leverage the Internet for that? But I have never shared any of my customer data with third parties. In principle I collect and use personal data only to the extent necessary to determine which kids get gifts and which ones don’t. I do receive letters from kids via email but I have secure servers and a strict data retention policy around that. And to be honest, this might be the last year I even bother to try to differentiate among these kids anyway.

Wow—that’s kind of a bombshell actually. You’re talking about just giving gifts to everybody?

Yeah, the Santa Claus brand has really taken a beating because of the public’s growing—and, let’s face it, overdue—focus on privacy. There’s so much abuse of personal information by Facebook and Google and all these other platforms, I feel like the baby being thrown out with the bathwater. And don’t even get me started on achieving GDPR compliance … that was a complete nightmare. Honestly, the costs to my business are so high with these regulations, it’s almost not worth it. I can think of worse things than naughty kids getting gifts on Christmas morning. Maybe if I just throw out the surveillance completely, and give presents to everybody, those wayward kids will stop nicking their siblings’ stuff—and I’ll save a bundle on all the effort I’m no longer making, all that data I’m no longer sifting through!

That seems really magnanimous of you…

Hey, I’m Santa! What do you expect?

Since we’re already kind of in the muck here, can we talk about the scrutiny you’ve had around workplace conditions and labor concerns?

Wow, I was kind of expecting more softballs from you! But hey, it’s all good. Look, I run a fair operation here—it’s always been a union shop and I’ve never fought that. I pay these elves a solid living wage year-round despite the highly seasonal nature of our business. I invite you to walk out on the floor yourself and ask any of these elves if they’re happy here. Well, not right now, obviously—they’re busier than a cat burying crap on a marble floor—but hit them up after New Year’s and they’ll tell you how reasonable a guy I am to work for.

Well, I’m sure you’re aware some elves have been lighting you up on Twitter…

Look, any workforce will have disgruntled types … and remember, this is the North Pole. Epidemiologists have long studied how seasonal affective disorder worsens the farther north you get. How many negative tweets from my elves do you get in summer? Go check—I’ll bet you don’t find any. All summer these elves party like rock stars … they don’t even need to sleep!

Fair enough. Now, you have perhaps the most non-diverse workforce in the world … is this by design?

I’m an equal-opportunity employer and if Chris Hemsworth applied for a job I’d gladly grant him an interview. The fact is, I don’t get a lot of applicants and most of my employees are related to one another. You’ve got siblings, offspring, fathers, uncles, aunts, nieces, nephews, and on and on, some of them third, fourth, fifth generation. Lots of companies talk about being like a family; we practically are. We’re like a family-run business times a thousand. And it works out because we’ve tailored the workshop to the elves’ size, so we’ve got a great ergonomic match there where Chris Hemsworth literally wouldn’t be a good fit.

Have you tried to diversify?

Back in the sixties I hired a lot of Oompa-Loompas, but they didn’t really integrate with our elves, and ultimately just couldn’t handle the conditions up here. The North Pole isn’t for everybody. But I never laid off a single one of those Oompa-Loompas. In fact, I’ve never laid off an elf either.

Let’s talk for a minute about Amazon. You’ve got kind of a love/hate thing going on there…

Well, yeah. It’s complicated. On the one hand, they’re eating into my business like anybody else’s, but since I’ve never had a single paying customer, this just eases my burden operationally. Of course I wonder if there’ll be a day when I become completely irrelevant, but I think the charm of a stuffed stocking and piles of beautifully wrapped presents left under the tree, instead of brown boxes left on the porch, will always have their cachet. And yes, it’s true I’ve partnered with Amazon for certain deliveries which has drawn some scrutiny.

Yes, if there’s an opposite of the halo effect you seem to be getting a bit of that…

Well, exactly. I’ve been delivering gifts to homes without fireplaces for centuries—I mean, think of all those New York and London apartments with radiators, or rural homes with propane tanks out back—but still people are shocked—shocked!—to learn that I don’t always slide down the chimney. So anything that challenges their Norman Rockwell sensibilities is suddenly a crime. The reality is, I’ve used a variety of courier services for ages, and a bunch of them have recently been bought up by Amazon. What am I gonna do, upset my whole system by changing providers on principle? The guy who schleps a hundred packages up the freight elevator on Christmas Eve doesn’t care that the company name on his pay stub has changed, nor does the doorman who knows to let him in. A million details go into delivering a billion packages on a single night and I can’t be reinventing the wheel every time Amazon buys someone. It’s not an ideal situation but in the final analysis, two billion gleeful children couldn’t care less.

At this point in the interview Mrs. Claus comes in with a large tray and serves us fresh-baked star-shaped cookies and hot coffee. She smiles demurely and, without a word, heads back toward the kitchen. “Thanks, Meg,” Santa says kindly, peering at her lovingly over his spectacles.

Wow … “Meg.” It’s funny, but I never knew Mrs. Claus’s first name. I didn’t really think about her even having a name.

It’s short for Margaret.

Would she … should we ask her to join us?

Oh, she has no use for journalists. And the way you’ve been grilling me, I can see why! (Laughs.) But seriously, she is a very private person, even more so than I, which is saying something. She’s perfectly happy to work behind the scenes, running the household and so forth. She’s very old-school.

Speaking of wives, and before I forget: my wife wanted me to ask you what you think of all these shopping mall Santas.

Well, historically I haven’t had any problem with them, as they’re fun for the kids and they mean well. There was always the worry that one would get drunk during his lunch break, then climb back in the chair and do something regrettable that would tarnish my image, but I can’t sweat all the what-ifs. But more recently I’ve started to worry about how skepticism is on the rise everywhere, what with fake news and Internet conspiracy theories and all that, and that kids will start putting two and two together—like, “Hey, I saw Santa at Macy’s last weekend, and then today I see him at Nordstrom and he’s like a foot shorter!”—and will stop believing in me as a result. I’m not a demanding person, I don’t seek a lot of attention or gratitude or anything, but the idea that a growing number of cynical kids are thinking the gifts I provided actually came from Mom and Dad … that really gets me down. So the white lie of mall Santas is starting to chafe a bit more these days, but in the end I just have to shrug it off with everything else.

Thanks Santa. And now I have just one more question. I know I’ve asked some tough ones today, so I’m going to lay off and instead turn it around to you: what’s the hands-down dumbest question any journalist has ever asked you?

That’s an easy one. Some dork said to me once, “Santa, you’re more than 1,700 years old. Almost nobody lives that long, the main exception being vampires. How can you convince me you’re not a vampire?”

I hope you put him in his place!

Of course I did.

Um … what exactly did you say?

Well, duh! I can’t be a vampire because vampires have to be invited in! There isn’t a soul on this planet who enters more homes without a spoken invitation. Didn’t that dickweed see “Let the Right One In”? Besides, I really only leave the North Pole once a year … whose blood am I supposed to drink all year? The elves’?

Wow, great points Santa. And thanks so much for sitting down with me today. And please thank Mrs. Claus for the goodies!

Thank you. And sorry a got a bit worked up just now … as you can imagine, I’m under a lot of stress these days. In fact, I’d better get back to work!

~--~--~--~--~--~--~---~--

Original artwork by Lindsay Albert.

For a complete index of albertnet posts, click here.

Family Internet Use Policy

Abstract

Generally, parents don’t go snooping around in their kids’ laptops or phones.  We want to respect our kids’ privacy.  And yet, these devices are like mega-megaphones, capable of blasting our kids’ unbridled ideas and photos all over the Internet.  Privacy in this realm is an illusion:  even with peer-to-peer online communication, kids cannot prevent their supposedly private content from being posted publicly or forwarded.  I describe here a way for parents to put much-needed limits on our kids’ online autonomy.

Introduction

My community has been through a serious scandal.  Some high school kids formed a secret Instagram group and, over a period of weeks, posted a lot of racist and misogynistic content (e.g., doctored photos and hateful sentiments).  Only a couple of kids were actually contributing content, but 14 or 15 others followed along, on an ongoing basis, instead of leaving the group.  What’s more, a number of these followers posted supporting comments and/or “likes.”  (It is widely hoped, but impossible to establish, that peer pressure was a stronger force here than bigotry.)  Finally one kid blew the whistle, and the whole thing unraveled, to the great shame of the students and families involved.

This episode has engendered a lot of soul searching among us parents.  We like to think we are instilling proper values in our kids—that we really know these people—but how can we be sure?  It’s easy to appraise the benefits of private music lessons, great schools, and organized sports teams, but how do we measure character and virtue?  At a minimum, how can we feel confident that our own kids won’t be embroiled in the next Internet scandal?

In this post I describe a solution.  It isn’t complicated, but it’s difficult.  I propose that every family establish and enforce a family Internet use policy.  The idea is to put limits on the secret online life that modern kids have, that gives them total freedom of expression with no parental supervision.  If we fail to instill the values and character we’re looking for, at least we can safeguard our kids against shaming themselves, their families, and their community.

A sample family Internet use policy

My family Internet acceptable use policy is based on the one my employer uses.  To wit, “[Company] monitors employees’ use of [Company’s] communications devices, computer systems and networks.”  I have told my kids up front, “I know your computer password and network logins, and reserve the right to read any of your online correspondence.  Consider nothing on your computer to be private.”  (If my kids had phones, those would be fair game, too.)

The premise here is that kids are less likely to post or consume offensive content if they know their parents can see it.  If this seems Orwellian to you, remember than in 1984 it was the government snooping, not parents.  I have a right to know what my kid is doing on the Internet, just as my employer has a right to know what I’m doing with the tools they give me.

Your policy doesn’t have to be this restrictive, of course—but you should have a policy, and something with more teeth than “Do whatever you want and we’ll hope for the best,” or “If you do something bad we might take away your phone.”

Do my kids tolerate this?  Yes, though of course they’re not thrilled.  Fortunately, I got an early start with this policy.  I introduced it before my kids were even online, so they were fine with it initially.  In fact, as they hadn’t yet developed the recklessness of teenagers, they were rightly concerned about accidentally stumbling on gross stuff online.  As they’ve reached their teens, their feelings have changed, but my wife and I won’t budge and they know it.  At least they’re used to the constraint.

So is this a perfect fix?  Probably not, but I’m sure it helps.  Without parental oversight, a kid is bound to be more bold and less inhibited with his or her expression.  I guarantee that the kids in my community who posted offensive photos to that Instagram account would not have printed hard copies and left them around the house.

Isn’t social media visible to parents anyway?

Kids might have you believe you can keep an eye on their virtual life via the public nature of social media.  But this isn’t true anymore.  Snapchat is all about messages and photos that are designed to be temporary. (Of course they’re actually not; your kid’s blunder can be captured for eternity by another kid’s screen grab.  It’s true, though, that once that transmission leaves your kid’s device, it’s too late for you to see it.)

Do parents grasp this?  Not always, as I learned from a workshop given by My Digital TAT2, a nonprofit organization seeking to promote responsibility in the digital era.  The lecturer quoted a teen correspondent as saying, “My favorite thing about Snapchat is that my parents don’t understand it.”  Most teens using Snapchat and Instagram have two accounts each:  one that their parents know about, and one that they don’t.  Many have a third account with which to assume a fictitious identity, which they use for retaliation and/or catfishing.  With all this subterfuge about, doesn’t it make sense to have access to the source of our teens’ online content—that is, their devices? 

Again, the point isn’t that you’re always snooping—it’s that your kids know you could, and behave accordingly.  As I candidly told my older daughter, I have peeped at her online correspondence exactly twice so far.  I explain to my kids that I generally don’t bother checking up, because I trust them—but I have to reserve the right to do so, or my policy goes up in smoke.

A kid’s right to privacy

Is my stance fair and reasonable?  Or am I violating my kids’ right to privacy?  That begs another question:  do kids even have a right to privacy?

Of course they do!  When one of my daughters was ten, she kept a diary.  Although I was sorely tempted to read it (because it was surely very cute), I honored my promise not to.  Likewise, I wouldn’t eavesdrop on my kids’ face-to-face conversations or phone calls, and I wouldn’t read a letter they got in the mail.  But the Internet is a game-changer.  It gives these kids the capability of broadcasting their ostensibly private communications to 3 billion people.  Mistakes are made, due to these kids’ own poor judgment, that of their friends (or “friends”), and by sheer accident.  I consider it irresponsible to give kids total autonomy online.

Setting limits isn’t just a parent’s right—it’s our job.  Are adults allowed to keep loaded guns around the house?  Unfortunately, they are.  Is it a good idea to give kids access to those loaded guns?  Of course not!  But think about Internet platforms like Snapchat, YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter:  they’re dangerous too, in their own way.  You almost couldn’t devise a more efficient way of giving teens new ways to screw up; of catching them in the act of screwing up; of widely publicizing the screw-up; and of documenting, time-stamping, and definitively establishing the fact of the screw-up, and the identity of the perpetrator, for all time.

Consider this scenario:  the year is 1980.  Teen 1, who is stupid and ignorant, tells Teen 2 a racist or misogynist joke.  Teen 2 laughs (maybe not because he even thinks the joke is funny; maybe because he’s uncomfortable).  Teen 3 overhears this exchange, and tells Teens 4 through 20 how racist/misogynistic these two are.  The damage is limited, because it’s all hearsay.  Teen 1 denies telling the joke, Teen 2 denies hearing it, Teen 3 is largely ignored, and Teens 4 through 20 shrug and move on.  Years later, Teen 1, who has become less ignorant, is privately ashamed of having told that joke, and Teen 2 is privately ashamed of having laughed.  They were just stupid kids, and thank goodness they can put that joke in the past and move on.  That’s pre-Internet.

Today, a couple dozen parents in my town—good, respected people, contributors to our community—are suffering deep shame because there is irrefutable evidence that their children consumed and in some cases “liked” racist and/or misogynist online content.  There is no way to repudiate the evidence; about all these beleaguered parents can do is assert that their kids aren’t actually hateful, that they were just swept away by a hateful meme.  That doesn’t go very far … not with the victims, and not with the community. 

Of course this isn’t an isolated case; these scandals are popping up everywhere.  And yet we parents have been standing back and allowing our teens unfettered access to these volatile Internet technologies.

The crux of the matter

Whether or not you agree about the non-sanctity of a teenager’s connected device, we need to help our kids understand something fundamental:  there’s no such thing as Internet privacy.  Once a photo or sentiment leaves your kid’s device, it’s a short step away from the great unwashed Internet.  If copy-and-paste isn’t available on the app that was used, screen grabs always are.  Any content that touches the Internet can be posted publicly and/or forwarded, whether by a recklessly playful or vindictive pal, or by mistake.  And we’ve seen that the law does not uphold the anonymity of Internet haters; consider this landmark case.  If a kid (or adult) thinks he or she can safely communicate his or her darkest thoughts via the Internet, even under some kind of shadow identity, he or she is mistaken.

Why isn’t it considered bad parenting to give these kids unfettered access to fun, easy, powerful online tools capable of permanently disgracing themselves and their families?  Probably because the beloved tech companies behind this Internet revolution are having their way with us.

The Internet and FOMO

I can’t think of a parent who hasn’t complained about his or her kid being glued to a screen all day, but nobody seems to know what to do about it.  In many cases parents are afraid of what would happen if they took away a kid’s phone or laptop.  (Ray Bradbury’s short story “The Veldt,” published in 1950, was eerily prescient in this regard.)  The Internet and its addictive social media trappings weren’t dumped on us; they evolved so gradually we never saw the danger coming.

Meanwhile, to push back against technology is to seem backward, unsophisticated, and out of touch.  Society expects all of us, including students, to use the Internet daily.  As we adults suffer our own insecurity around keeping up with the rapidly evolving online culture, we are tempted to celebrate and emulate our kids’ prowess.  We blithely accept this totally separate virtual world, which becomes a constantly growing blind spot, like a locked door between ourselves and our kids.  In the process we lose touch with our kids’ morals, standards, and character.  Kids are typing things online that we’d shudder to hear them say out loud, and sharing photos that might shock us.

So if parents aren’t policing this, who is?  The Internet platforms themselves?  Yeah, right.  Remember, Mark Zuckerberg’s first online venture was a site where you rated your fellow students in terms of who was hotter than who.  He and his ilk most certainly do not have your kids’ backs. 

Consider this excerpt from a New Yorker article, which describes the philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre’s misgivings about the Enlightenment, and how it threatened the idea of a universal moral code: 

It becomes impossible to settle moral questions or to enforce moral rules; the best we can do is agree to disagree. Such a world falls into the hands of managers and technocrats, who excel at the perfection of means but lack the tools with which to think deeply about ends.

I don’t have strong opinions about the Enlightenment, and MacIntyre was writing in the ‘80s, but that last sentence fits social media companies to a T.  The means of capturing and directing people’s attention are being perfected, but the impact on society is being largely ignored.  Venture capitalists are backing the companies best poised to monetize this stuff; they’re not throwing money at watchdog outfits like Digital TAT2.  Popularity—measured by the number of eyeballs on your app, the number of “likes,” and the number of links to your content—comprise the currency of our era.  (We parents are somewhat complicit here.  I’m sure many a parent dreams of his kid becoming the next Zuckerberg.  I doubt many are hoping their kid becomes the next great moralizer.)

Platforms like Instagram and Snapchat have our kids’ attention.  To an increasing degree we parents do not.  The scale is tipping increasingly toward a peer orientation where our parental influence is marginalized.  Only by reigning in the access to this virtual world can we hope to maintain our crucial role in guiding our children.  Failing that, the least we can do is limit the damage they can do online.

More albertnet posts on this topic

Dopamine, Parenting, & Social Media

Teens, Texts, & the Marshmallow Test

--~--~--~--~--~--~--~---~--

For a complete index of albertnet posts, click here.

Fiction - Guide to Managing Millennials

NOTE: This post is rated PG-13 for crude humor and mature themes.

Announcement

I am happy to announce that this is my 100th blog post since I started albertnet! My first post was in February of 2009. Funny … it doesn’t seem like that long ago.

Introduction

I got a solicitation in my work e-mail that was either spam or a reasonable business proposition, depending on your point of view. (As the aptly named Senator Packwood pointed out, “How can you know until you try?”) The solicitation was from whitepapersforbiz.com and was for a $99, 18-page guide on “Managing Generation Y.” The ad started out: “Generation Y. The Internet Generation. Millennials. Whatever you call them, this new generation of workers is the largest to hit the workforce since the Boomers, and they bring with them unique expectations.”

Right away this caught my attention. First of all, I was thrown by this term “Millennials.” Millennials? As in, born around the turn of the century? These people are eleven now. Please tell me they aren’t invading the workforce. Meanwhile, if the workforce is being flooded with these Gen-Y types, during a terrible recession with the worst unemployment in decades, who are they to be expecting anything? How about “being happy just to have a job”? Why should we coddle and cater to these people?

Naturally, I’m just being a bitter old man here. Obviously we need these youngsters very badly, because they “get it,” they can conceive of the next great “killer app,” they can solve our office computer problems, and many of them are still good-looking enough to be the public face of our companies as the rest of us, skin wrinkling and backs aching, run out the clock on our miserable lives. It has always been thus. So, the management guide makes perfect sense.

This is where I come in. I’m guessing that most corporate wage slaves—especially “individual contributors” (i.e., non-managers) like myself—are going to find $99 a bit steep for an 18-page electronic document, especially when the advertisement has embarrassing typos like “3 way to develop productive relationships with Millennials.” (Whether they meant “3 ways” or “3-way”—which would be kind of shocking—that’s pretty sloppy). So I figured, why don’t I write my own guide, which would be shorter (and thus better), and much, much cheaper? I might not have done as much research as these guys, but a little advice is better than nothing. Best yet, I let my PayPal account lapse, so I’m not even going to charge you. You can just buy me a beer next time I see you.

[Please note that what follows is fiction. I do not allude to any actual company in this piece, nor am I a human resources type, nor do I actually have real advice for anybody in this realm. It’s just for fun. Okay? Good.]

THE ALBERTNET GUIDE TO MANAGING MILLENNIALS

Seven core traits of Generation Y

Naturally there are vast differences among the members of any generation, but certain generalizations can be made (and are essential to handy pocket guides like this). This guide will concern only Americans born in 1990 or later, and who are entering the corporate world of offices rather than service-sector jobs, self-employment, or itinerant farm labor. Also, this guide only discusses males. Research for the equivalent guide for female employees is still underway as it is a much more complicated matter. (The section about boots and other footwear, by itself, is likely to eclipse this entire guide.) Stay tuned for how to order this second guide as soon as it is available!

Here are the seven core traits of Generation Y:

Informal – They consider not only words like “sir” and “please” to be old-fashioned, but also formerly widespread ideas like politeness, hierarchies, and decorum.

Connected – They are continuously in touch with a very wide, though seldom deep, electronic network of other Millennials (along with older sickos masquerading as them).

Casual – Old-fashioned business attire like suits, ties, socks, and clean shaves have been virtually abandoned by Gen-Y.

Entitled – This generation was raised by parents who were kids in the seventies—that is, whose parents were only into themselves. The backlash of the seventies selfish parents has manifested in overindulgent nineties/aughts parents who showered their kids with love, attention, praise, and expensive toys, making Gen-Y hugely imbued with a sense of entitlement.

Scattered – Millennials don’t have time for MTV, full magazine articles, lectures, books, or this guide. Their intellectual activity is the equivalent of waiting tables. They’re able to keep a dozen different text/Tweet/phone conversations going while seeming to be paying attention to you, but their mental worlds are too frantic for deep thoughts or discussions.

Public – Generation Y has become so inured to self-disclosure, due primarily to Facebook and other social networks, that the line between public and private has been essentially erased.

Smart – As far as we can tell, these kids are really, really smart. (We kind of have to say this, in case one of them happens to read this guide and becomes really, really offended.)

Deep down, Millennials are not only aware of these traits, but are very proud of them. This means if any member of an older generation, especially somebody in management, demonstrates these traits, the Gen Y employee is likely to feel patronized. You will do well to be as polite, isolated, well-attired, timid, organized, private, and, well, clueless as possible in the presence of Gen Y. This shouldn’t be that hard. Just be yourself.

Getting off on the right foot

A big part of your success in managing a Millennial is hiring the right one to begin with. Careful recruiting has never been more important—or more difficult—than it is now. Here are some pointers.

One of the most common mistakes managers make when recruiting Gen Y is to be visibly startled by the candidate’s appearance. This can cause the candidate to clam up completely, or else to lash out. If you know what to expect, you can keep your cool and have a positive recruiting experience. Things to be ready for:

• The candidate may not wear a necktie to the interview. Many Gen Yers literally cannot believe that this would be expected, even in an interview.
• Clip-on tie? Hide your astonishment. The candidate may sincerely want to please but knows he could never actually tie a tie; or, he is wearing the clip-on ironically.
• Giant fist-sized perfectly symmetrical Windsor knot? You’ve got a great candidate: somebody who actually trusts the sartorial advice of his (albeit misguided) father or grandfather enough to get help tying his tie. This guy is more likely to be emotionally stable, and might also be more docile in accepting quaint workplace traditions like working hard.
• Corporate logo, penis graphic, or animal art on a necktie? Roll with it—unless it’s a donkey or elephant. That could mean a politically active person, who could seriously damage workplace productivity during election season.
• Totally oversized suit? Could be a loaner from Dad. Or maybe the candidate got a bad clothier recommendation from a pal and went to Big & Tall. So many Millennials are seriously overweight, Big & Tall has become almost the de facto clothier for interview suits. (In fact, the parent corporation, LivingXL, is considering rebranding the clothing chain “Big & Normal.”)

Traditionally, an interview consists of an employer asking questions of the candidate to find out if he is qualified for the job. Today, the candidate’s ability should be assumed. Technology is changing so fast, your candidate will probably have an innovative, super-efficient way of carrying out his work tasks—something you never would have dreamed of. Or, the Gen Y new-hire may think of totally different job activities, or even a totally new business for your company to get into. Thus, the main purpose of the job interview is to convince the candidate that your company is a cool place to work—even while you take care to avoid coming off as a poseur.

Three ways to Motivate Millennials

There are of course countless ways to motivate your Gen Y employees, most of which work only some of the time. But we have identified three surefire ways to get the most out of your Millennials:

Interns. Always have some interns around to do most of the work. Not only do interns not require motivation (after all, trying to turn their internship into a paying job is all the motivation they will ever need), having them to kick around will build and sustain the self-esteem of your Gen Y employees.

Rejiggered ratings. In the traditional ratings scale used for older employees, change “underachieving” to “achieving”; change “achieving” to “exceeding expectations”; and change “exceeding expectations” to “needs improvement.” The name changes to the lower ratings are to protect an employee’s morale, since Millennials in these rungs obviously came through the “praise everybody” system where every player on the soccer team gets a trophy, even the ones who never kicked the ball. The name of the top tier is designed for offspring of Tiger Mothers, who respond only to verbal abuse.

Free soda. Fountain beverages are extremely inexpensive but really make your Gen Y employees feel valued. Put the beverage company’s marketing machine to work for you! (Note: do not offer Shasta or other off-brand beverages—this will backfire!)

Public vs. private

Self-disclosure is a habit for Millennials, so you should be braced for offhanded disclosures, ranging from the candid to the downright maudlin, that would have been unheard of a generation ago. The danger here is that your reaction could catch your employee completely off-guard and cause him terrible embarrassment. It is natural to assume that anybody of this generation would have pretty thick skin, but actually they do not. There is no non-verbal communication on Facebook, and face-to-face workplace interactions are not something the typical Gen-Y person is accustomed to. A poker face and a ready comment (e.g., “How did that make you feel?”) are advised.

For example, in his first or second week on the job a Millennial might make reference to something his therapist said to him. Generation Y, unlike the proud and/or shame-filled ones before it, is very relaxed about getting a little help sometimes. To show surprise at this disclosure—to say nothing of gasping—would be a very damaging, and alienating, faux pas. Instead you should respond (practice this in the mirror if necessary), “Wow, that’s very perceptive. Say, is your therapist accepting new patients?”

Of course, playing off your Gen Y employee’s disclosure is totally different from disclosing anything of an even remotely personal nature yourself. Why? Because you’re like the Millennial’s mom or dad, so for you to open up is embarrassing (in the “eww!” way). If, say, you mention that you have an appointment with a dermatologist, don’t be surprised if your Gen Y employee says, “Dude—TMI!”

To the great consternation of human resources departments nationwide, Gen Y employees cannot be prevented from Tweeting about just about everything that happens in the workplace. The only way to keep your company’s private business private is to require employees to create a Twitter alter-ego. You can put a positive spin on this requirement when explaining it to your Millennials. One benefit: with this alter ego they can be even more brash, insulting not just their enemies but their friends.

Of course, everybody mentioned in these Tweets must have a pseudonym as well. To assure this, have your employees refer to their colleagues (and yourself) by whatever secret nicknames they’re already using. Tell your employee, “If you think of me as ‘Balding Douchelord,’ just use that nickname in your Tweets.” If the employee resists, get him excited by saying, “As of yet nobody has created an iPad app that turns a name into an alias, like ‘Joseba Bloviatronica’ for ‘Joe Blow,’ then checks its availability. Somebody is going to make a killing on that app!”

Internet use

Telling a Millennial not to use Facebook while at work would be a real morale-crusher, so you have to allow it. But with other types of Internet abuse, you need to be more firm. Specifically, you can’t have employees using the corporate network to steal media content. Gen Y-ers cannot grasp that sharing MP3 files or downloaded movies is theft; this is literally beyond their comprehension. Explain that there are some upper-level managers who just don’t “get it,” and that these managers unfortunately have the authority to fire people. This will no doubt elicit a knowing smirk—Millennials are expert at covering their tracks—so you must follow up by saying, in a low voice, “Look, there are sysadmin people in this company very jealous of your success. They might just have nothing better to do than set up network traps to get you busted.”

Of course, even bringing up Internet acceptable use policy will get you labeled as one of “them,” so to build back the rapport with your Millennial, you need to get up, close your door, draw your blinds, and let him in on a little “secret”: that there’s a conference room with an extra PC that isn’t on the corporate network but instead steals Internet connectivity from the Starbucks in the lobby. He can use this PC to browse untoward websites, just like he did at the public library as a junior high kid.

Sensitivity training

Gen Y-ers are known for being sensitive. But this doesn’t mean they’re sensitive to others’ feelings—just to their own. We’d all like to think these kids have evolved into something kinder and gentler than we are, but honestly, what can we expect from a generation whose credo is “Sucks to be you!”?

It is widely accepted among Millennials that you can insult somebody as bluntly as you want, as long as you say, “Ha ha, you’ve just been punked!” afterward. It is very uncommon, however, for them to consider their audience for such gibes; that is, they’re just as likely to insult a grey-haired senior colleague as one of their pals. Naturally you cannot assume the senior colleague will understand, so you need to alter the Gen Y employee’s behavior.

The best angle to work here is the purely pragmatic. Don’t say, “Now Tyler, you shouldn’t give Donald a hard time just because he prints out so many documents. He’s kind of sensitive about his work habits and feels like you’re making fun of his age.” That’s just not going to work. What you should say is, “Tyler, don’t make fun of Donald. He’s a gun nut and kind of unstable.”

This sensitivity washes both ways. For example, if Donald, who is putting his daughter through Columbia, sees fit to pack a sack lunch every day, he certainly may. But just because he’s always eaten peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches doesn’t mean he can continue to do so. Millennials are likely to be allergic to peanuts, and even if they’re not, would be scandalized to see a peanut product right out there in the open. After all, peanut products are practically a controlled substance in modern schools. In deference to Gen Y, have your older employees switch to another type of nut butter.

Conclusion

This guide is really just the beginning. Behaviors among Generation Y are always changing and shifting, even as older employees become ever more rigid, even brittle, in their ways. Perhaps the best way to motivate Millennials, and make them feel good, is to ask their opinion about how you should behave. (It’s tempting to have them critique this guide, but of course they’re much too busy.)

dana albert blog