I don’t know whether Miley Cyrus (Hannah Montana), Tom Cruise or the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr. are familiar with any 12-Step Program, but they could benefit from some helpful guidance offered by those programs.

Most of the well-known 12-Step Programs (e.g., Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous) operate under a set of principles known as the Twelve Traditions. Number 11 states, “Our public relations policy is based on attraction rather than promotion; we need always maintain personal anonymity at the level of press, radio, and films.” Number 12 states, “Anonymity is the spiritual foundation of all our traditions, ever reminding us to place principles before personalities.”

My friends who taught me about 12-Step Programs said Traditions 11 and 12 protect both the individual and the 12-Step Program as a whole. They protect the individual because they discourage a member of the program from being “put on a pedestal” and becoming known as an “expert” on addictions or compulsive behavior in the media. That media spotlight could bring pressure that might, in combination with a failure to “work the program,” prove detrimental to the member. The traditions protect the 12-Step Program because it won’t be linked in the public’s mind with the failure of any individual member.

Take an example of a celebrity who goes on a media tour, stating that he or she is an alcoholic, but has stopped drinking thanks to Alcoholics Anonymous. If that celebrity later drinks, and that is reported in the media, some other active alcoholic might say, “I guess that A.A. Program doesn’t work.” Regardless of the fact that millions of people have successfully found and maintained sobriety through the A.A. Program, this person sees the failure of one famous person as representing the effectiveness of an entire program.

When 15-year-old Miley professes her Christianity–then agrees to be photographed in a sexually-tinged pose, she falls off the pedestal. When Rev. Wright engages in a clash of religion, politics and race, he stumbles from his soap box. When Tom Cruise appears irrational, then attacks someone for trying to retain rationality, he slides off of the pedestal and upsets the soap box.

No one is perfect, of course. None of us on a bad day would want to be held up to the media spotlight. When circumstances or good fortune, or old-fashioned hard work culminate in media attention, those 12-Step Traditions can be helpful in maintaining our perspective, and the reputation of the organizations or movements we hold dear.

I read (and write) warnings about the need to protect future job prospects and professional relationships by being careful about what we write in blogs. Someone interested in hiring me someday will learn a lot about me from the many posts I’ve written over the years.

But today I got a wonderful reminder about another side of blogging. It helps reconnect people separated by time and distance.

I received an email at work that contained the following exchanges:

Former college friend:

janey lou passed this along… keefe has a blog! and gray hair! and he’s suddenly morphed from a hip college dude into a suburban dad interested in family fun and spirituality. who knew?

Former college Journalism advisor:

YIKES!! Live in the present? And here I thought Keefe lived in the FAR OUT!

My reply to both:

Okay, the gray hair is true (better than NO hair), but the “suburban dad interested in family fun and spirituality” is only part of the puzzle. I still keep an eye on the dark side! [I threw in a link to the Big Dominatrix post from yesterday, just to show them how edgy I am these days.] I am thrilled to hear from you both! Please write back or call my cell so that we can catch up. I’m starting to crank up my podcasting as well as blogging, and maybe we can think of something to record together.

I would really enjoy reconnecting with the many great people I met at Eastern Illinois University, especially the daily student newspaper where we learned a lot about communications and life—both good and bad. Thanks to my blog, it looks like that will happen very easily!

eiu journalism blog

I sometimes feel like I’m beating my head against the wall whenever I try to teach my kids lessons on Internet safety and privacy. They’re relatively young (Kevin is 14 and Caitlyn is 12), and they haven’t seen or heard much of the sordid side of online communications.

Another case study recently whipped across my desk—but I don’t think I can share it with my kids yet. Maybe in a few years. Here’s the background. Tell me what you think.

I was reading an issue of Automotive News, a trade magazine geared toward the automotive industry. I was beginning to get a little punch-drunk from the usual collection of bland articles, when an article on page 46 hit me right between the eyes.

“Racy scandal for race exec” was the headline on an article that reported that Max Mosley, president of Federation Internationale de l’Automobile, the sanctioning body for Formula One and other international racing circuits, was caught on video recently with his pants down. Actually, with his pants, and every other stitch of clothing, removed from his 67-year-old body.

The video, which was posted on the British News of the World website, started a sort of media flogging of Mosley. According to the Automotive News story, in the video, the naked Mosley administered lashes to one of five prostitutes, counting the strokes in “vigorous German” and adding, in German-accented English, “She needs more of ze punishment!” Later, he gets punished by a dominatrix for being a bad boy.

Mosley is fighting off calls that he resign, lashing out at his critics, saying that the video was of a private matter that was “harmless and completely legal.” (I checked…prostitution among consenting adults is legal in London, where the video was made. Side-note: prostitution is not legal in Monaco, where Mosley lives with his wife.)

You may be thinking at this point, “So what is the lesson that you want to share with your kids, Tom? Tell us before we have to pull it out of you!”

In what, to Max Mosley, must have been a painfully twisted idea, the S&M sex video was filmed with a camera hidden in the brassiere of one of the participants (not Max, I’m assuming). That’s it; that’s the point that I want my kids to understand.

The world in which we live is closer than anyone would have thought to the “Big Brother” world written about by George Orwell. Only it is even more insidious than Orwell imagined, because rather than an evil government conspiring to remove our privacy, we are doing it to ourselves. Through our brassieres, through our camera phones, through our lack of respect for privacy.

My kids need to know this, before they start adding videos of their own (hopefully much more family-friendly than Max’s) to their MySpace, or Facebook, or whatever place they will consider to be “private,” “safe” and “boss” in the future. Because it isn’t only Big Brother we need to fear today; it’s Big Dominatrix with the Little Video Camera…or our best friend who doesn’t have the sense to yell “Cut.”
“max+mosley” prostitution video privacy commakazispeek

If you’re a student, or have ever been one, I strongly encourage you to watch the recently released documentary, “Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed.” It can help renew the healthy skepticism and willingness to explore new ideas that can promote discernment, greater learning and increased tolerance–skills and attitudes that many schools purport to foster, while stifling in reality.

At least discernment, learning and tolerance when it relates to the validity and scope of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and a second theory, Intelligent Design.

As stated in a press kit on the website for the movie, “In a controversial new satirical documentary, author, former presidential speechwriter, economist, lawyer and actor Ben Stein travels the world, looking to some of the best scientific minds of our generation for the answer to the biggest question facing all Americans today: Are we still free to disagree about the meaning of life? Or has the whole issue already been decided…while most of us weren’t looking?”

What do you think, readers? As a writer with journalism training and experience, I would be hard-pressed to think of something that bothers me more professionally AND personally than a person or institution (educational, governmental, religious or other) that actively and purposefully works to stifle freedoms—with freedom of speech and thought being near the top of the list.

Man’s inhumanity to man so often is played out by a degradation of rights and privileges, as dissent is cowered, obedience is demanded and resistance is punished. Don’t get me wrong—the scientists and learned people who are shown in “Expelled” have not suffered anything like people in devastated regions like Darfur, areas of China, South and Central America, or past generations who died in concentration camps, killing fields and the Roman Coliseum.

Ben Stein however, has purposely connected his documentary, both visually and factually, with major historical events that divided nations and resulted in the suffering and deaths of millions: Nazi Germany’s desire to rid humanity of genetically “inferior” people and the Berlin Wall that kept freedom and dissent out of a major portion of Eastern Europe after World War II.

Okay, you may think that it is over the top to discuss Adolf Hitler’s massacre of millions of Jews, Christians, Gypsies and others in the same breath as the fate of a teacher in Seattle, WA (USA) who doesn’t make tenure because of a paper that dares to consider the possibility of intelligent design. Take that skepticism, or disbelief, or whatever you call it with you to the next screening of “Expelled.” Then remember that Hitler didn’t set up the crematoriums on the first night that he took power in the 1930s. No, first he and his henchmen worked methodically to stifle the right to speak or think in opposition to the ruling authority. Today, the ruling authority in terms of science doesn’t want to engage in the discussion regarding intelligent design.

If you see the movie and then comment here along the lines of, “Nice try, but here’s why I don’t think that Ben Stein is right,” we can have a good discussion. Just don’t comment cavalierly that you don’t need to consider the question because “intelligent design is for religious morons and can’t hold a candle to evolution.”

Because then I might be closer to the truth by saying that rather than keeping an open mind, your head was squeezed shut so tightly that your brains fell out.

On my drive to work earlier this week, I heard the familiar voice of a writer colleague on the radio. I soon became uncomfortable listening to my colleague, for reasons that I’ll share shortly. The experience reminded me about the absolutely different skills required of a speaker and a writer.

I’m not going to name the writer because my post isn’t an attack on him; it’s an appeal to every person who may be interviewed or stand before an audience at a conference or other speaking engagement. Practice speaking, and consider getting training and experience in public speaking through associations or organizations such as Toastmasters, International.

A few months ago, after seeing some weaknesses in my speaking style, I joined a Toastmasters club that had just formed at work. Although I’ve only completed a few talks, I already see and hear the improvement in my structured and off-the-cuff talks. Club members actually gloat now when they catch me saying “um” or “err.” It doesn’t happen often!

My work within the Toastmasters program is what made me more aware of the conversation that my colleague had earlier this week with the host of a major Chicago-based radio station. The colleague was being interviewed regarding an article he had written that appears in the most recent issue of a consumer magazine.

As the colleague answered question after question from the radio host, my emotions changed from excitement, to bemusement, to unbelief, and finally to sadness. This colleague is a solid communicator—of the written word. He has strong journalistic senses and churns out a massive amount of well-written online and print articles and opinion pieces.

But he seemed ill-prepared and very unsure of himself during the radio interview. He stumbled over himself and strung out disjointed answers to the host’s relatively straightforward questions about the background for the article and some general questions about the people who are featured prominently in the article.

It sounded like the radio host had awakened my colleague from a deep sleep in the middle of night. But the reality must have been that the interview was prearranged, giving my colleague time to prepare.

I’m more convinced than ever of the very different skills involved in writing and speaking. Of course, both require organization and an understanding of how to communicate with an audience. But a writer cannot just “wing it” in front of an audience (or a radio host) without a different kind of preparation. When he tries, the lack of preparation comes through loudly and clearly.

I want to make sure that you have the opportunity to download a copy of, “The Power of Words,” a free white paper from The Catchpole Corporation and Best Practices in Corporate Communications (BPCC).

It contains “an invigorating collection of famous speeches, soliloquies, and ruminations that illustrate the timeless force that words, uniquely configured, can achieve,” according to BPCC.

I’ve had the opportunity to read just a couple, and I look forward to reading the rest.

Enjoy!

My headline is long, and the explanation for the question it raises could be much longer. I’ll try to keep it short, and explain how I plan to change the focus of this blog…sort of.

When I first started blogging, I was focused on communications issues, primarily filtering my comments through the more than 25 years of experience I have gained as a journalist, trade magazine senior editor, public relations specialist, and corporate communications coordinator–among other positions.

In some of my posts, I was able to take the position of a knowledgeable outsider–someone who understood the communications situation or issue, and whose perspective wasn’t colored by any emotion or agenda that might exist if I were an active participant in the situation or issue.

But over time, I’ve grown frustrated over my lack of freedom to share any thoughts or opinions about communications situations and issues that involve me directly. I’ve said it before: The main reason that you don’t see more blogging by internal communications professionals outside of their internal networks is that it is career hindering.

“Loose cannons” don’t get promoted in most organizations, and it is difficult to effect real change when you are not placed highly in an organization. I don’t want to be perceived as a loose cannon to my employer, and I want to build bridges between the subsidiary for which I work and the parent company.

The many conversations and situations gathered over my career that I don’t feel free to share here would be poignant in a novel. And that has been my novel idea for a while!

In the meantime, I’ll write here about matters that are important to me, but the topics will be as broad as my interests–which cover a much larger space than internal communications. Whatever I write, I’ll pick topics that I can speak about unencumbered by any real or imagined restraints–other than good taste.

During a much-needed and unplanned sabbatical from podcasting and blogging, I thought about my plans for this site. CommaKazi Speek began as an extension of my desire to delve into the world of social media. First, I blogged. Then I created podcasts.

Both ventures provided me with practical experience and a better perspective of this portion of the social media space. They helped me to connect with other bloggers and podcasters. They let me stretch my professional skill set while having fun.

Like a lot of people, I have plans for my life–both professionally and personally. Those plans change at times, due to circumstances or opportunities. I wondered whether my blog and podcast could help me launch into a different phase of my career. They didn’t. They remain a hobby without reward, other than personal satisfaction.

That only goes so far, when I have to balance other commitments and responsibilities. So I’m planning to shut down my CommaKazi Speek podcast site as soon as I ready this blog to handle podcasts. Why pay Libsyn to store my old shows, when I can’t be sure when I will have new content ready to post? I’ll be downloading PodPress and then using it to distribute any podcasts that I choose to create in the future.

At the same time, I’ll be changing the focus of this blog…sort of. In June 2005 I launched the predecessor of this blog on Blogger.com. My purpose for launching the site was to prepare me to blog as a volunteer at the 2005 IABC International Conference. I believed that blogging at the IABC conference would:

• help me to focus during the conference
• broaden my networking efforts
• force me to dive into this blogging thing

My final reason given at the time was that Warren Bickford, 2005 IABC Chair, had asked for volunteers, and “it seemed like a good idea at the time.”

Those initial posts on the IABC Cafe opened the door for me to continue posting there for a couple of years, while I moved this blog to its current home.

Because I started blogging at an international conference for communicators on its blog, the focus of my blog posts up to now primarily has been on communications issues. About what else was I going to write?

As time passed, although I was careful to keep a self-imposed wall between my work as a corporate communicator and my opinions expressed on the two blogs (mine and the IABC Cafe), that wall negatively impacted my ability to write meaningful posts regarding communication trends and experiences. The bottom-line point for this post is that I plan to move away from communication issues…sort of.

I’ll write more about this tomorrow.

Hi, it’s been a while–more than two months–since I stopped posting here. Although I didn’t pre-plan the start of my “sabbatical,” or know at the beginning that I was taking one at all, it was a necessary and helpful thing for me to do.

During the past two months, my time and energy have been spent on family, other matters of no global import, and both physical and spiritual renewal. Many times, I had thoughts to express on this blog, but never did.

And did the world suffer? Hah! What clearer message could I have received than almost no contact from readers asking what was up. I’ve been able to reset my perspective and priorities since receiving confirmation that neither I nor this blog are crucial to the survival of the blogosphere (lol).

So what happens next here, if anything? I’ll continue to write, with a different focus. I have a plan for this blog and my soon-to-disappear podcast site.

Shel Holtz has launched a campaign to resist the blocking of employee access to online content such as blogs and social networking sites like Facebook. As an internal communications professional who recently had to deal with IT’s blocking of the MyRagan social networking site (but, interestingly, not Melcrum’s The Communicators’ Network site), I sympathize with the stop blocking campaign.

I work in the financial services subsidiary of a global automotive manufacturer, where the issue of access to external sites isn’t as clear-cut as Shel and some others might suggest. Federal auditors come regularly to inspect the company’s procedures, processes and information security. My company is serious about maintaining the privacy of its customers, and it leans toward measures that improve data security rather than increasing unfettered employee access to information.

Many times, I’ve gotten upset or shaken my head when I learned about the latest decision regarding what access to block within the company. For the most part, I have access to anything that I need to do my job well. It sometimes required me to jump through a hoop or two, to get IT to restore access to something. For example, next month, most people within my company will not be able to use the USB ports on their computers to transfer data.

That decision was based on an audit finding. When the new policy was announced via broadcast email, I started to “see red”–until I read a portion of the email that provided information on how to retain access to the USB drives.

It took a couple of conversations with our information security team, but I was able to easily and calmly explain why I need to be able to transfer digital camera images, graphic files and audio/video files. It helps that I don’t have access to sensitive customer data, so my PC and network connections are not the same security risk as a customer service representative or someone in our Credit and Funding Department.

Anyone in my company who wants to retain access to the USB ports on their PCs must follow an agreement that spells out what is proper and improper use of the USB ports. I’ve summarized the main points below to show that they are common-sense, and not draconian.

Removable Media Agreement
• Use only company approved and supplied devices for writing to removable media.
• Take all reasonable steps to assure the security of removable media and all data on removable media.
• Under no circumstances transfer ANY customer or employee private information to removable media.
• Do not put confidential information on any form of removable media without manager’s approval.
• Do not use removable media to introduce or remove any software from any company system.
• You will be responsible for the introduction or removal of data from any company system via removable media.
• Do not use any company data for personal or commercial use or gain.

Violating this policy may result in disciplinary action up to and including termination of employment.

What do you think about limiting access to the USB ports of employee PCs? Is that done in your company?

Technorati tags:
holtz security blocking usb