Stephen Colbert, much like his network neighbor Jon Stewart, has his own satirical half hour show on Comedy Central. Also like Stewart, Colbert makes much of his material on poking fun at the political machines that seem to contradict themselves on a daily basis. However, Colbert is more the radical prankster little brother to Stewart's big brotherly witty humor. This was seen in the last presidential election where Colbert actually tried to run for President, but was denied a spot on the ballot. Undeterred by this, Colbert has again pushed the envelope and has now created his own Super PAC, a fundraising group often associated with a certain presidential candidate. Colbert's Super PAC, American's for a better tomorrow, tomorrow, has no affiliation with a specific candidate, instead the goal is to try to not only poke fun at the absurdity of the current political fund raising system, but also educate people on why this system is bad for American's in general.
The political fund raising system was turned on its head last year by a supreme court ruling in the case of Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission. The decision went something like this:
"If an individual has a constitutional right to make an independent expenditure" — meaning one not directly associated with a particular candidate or campaign — "then a group of individuals has the same right acting as a group."
This gave the Super PACs the ability to spend as much money as they want, and generally without having to disclose where they got the money from. Colbert found the absurdity in this and as of June created his own Super PAC, American's for a better tomorrow, tomorrow. Colbert is using this SuperPAC to expose the ways that this can and is being used unfairly and often times against the wills of the average American.
His first action with the Super PAC was in Iowa before the straw poll in August where he ran ads criticizing the spending of Rick Perry who had 6 Super Pacs raising money on his behalf. Colbert's ads attacked this and told people to vote for Richard Parry, saying the a "Stands for America, and for IowA"
All the while this is happening, Colbert is updating the followers of his television show about the progress of the SuperPac (which is funded mostly from his audience base) and explaining how it works, how he is using it to both mock politicians and mock the system itself.
The main issue at the heart of this is the ruling that corporations and unions can now donate unlimited amounts of money to these Super Pacs and often times the SuperPacs don't even have to disclose where the money comes from. This is a key issue with the occupy wall street movements happening across the country. Colbert is using both his television show platform to try and inform and change society, but he is also using his referent and expert power that he has over his viewers to both donate to the change and to follow it. With over 165,000 people have signed up as supporters of the SuperPac, it is not just a tiny following either.
Colbert is also so enthusiastic about his endeavors, he leads his follows using authentic leadership. He may not connect with them and build strong relationships, but he has conviction in his words and actions, and he does have goals to try and change the current political fundraising system. His followers are almost cult like, seemingly he can do nothing wrong, and they are willing to help him educate the country about this problem, and maybe get a few laughs out of it as well.
Sources - Stephen Colbert pac more than a gag
Superpac explained by Colbert lawyer
- Randall Smith
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Steve Jobs
Steve Jobs revolutionized the world of technology. As the CEO of Apple, he changed the way CEOs think. Not only did he push the company to out-perform and out-compete all other companies in the industry, he was more involved in his company than most CEOs. Jobs didn’t necessarily change the opinion of the public, but he changed the way we live today and changed the way CEOs and other company employees think about business.
When Steve Jobs passed recently, it struck the world. For days, his name was “trending” on Twitter and mass amounts of content were posted all over the internet. The public felt his loss and knew it would be devastating; the world of technology may never grow at such a fast pace. Even if a person was to not think about all of the things he did for Apple, for just a moment, the things he did for other companies was monumental. He did not purposefully help any competitors. However, everyone looked to Jobs as an industry standard. Dell, Windows, HP, etc, they all looked at Apple to be the company that they needed to keep up with. The iPod was developed; Microsoft soon made the Zune. The iPhone was developed; Verizon scurried to release the Android. The iPad was next, followed by other company’s attempts at a tablet. Whatever Apple made, the rest of the industry knew they had to capitalize on the design, function and success of that product.
Jobs knew that innovation was the key. Being the first to introduce a product is great. But Jobs knew being better was more important than being first. A great example of this is the Palm Pilot. Palm Computing came out with one of the most forward thinking technologies to date. This device could electronically hold notes, contact information, had backlight, had RAM memory, could sync with your computer, and a list of things that were almost unimaginable before this. But where is the Palm Pilot today? The answer is no where significant. 10 years later, Apple released the iPhone. He was not the first to release a PDA, but by far the most successful. His patience and insistence on being the best is what keeps Apple running.
His ability to run a company as well as have such a presence and influence in the research and development side of a company was unheard of. His knowledge and power seemed astronomical.
This video is a bit lengthy, but if you look at the initial reaction of people when Jobs announces the iPhone, it is amazing. People are more than excited to hear about his pitch. You can tell these employees truly believe in what Jobs says, does, believes in, and is working towards. He created such a positive atmosphere for his employees. His leadership skills were unmatched. The way he worked in the field and was so innovative, his employees had a great amount of respect for him.
He has single handedly changed the way we live today. As you see in the video (the pitch was less than 5 years ago), people are astounded by the thought of a phone, internet, and iPod on one device. Today, it’s hard to imagine a device with any less. Without Jobs pushing the envelope, developing new devices, new technologies, where would we be? What would Microsoft have developed; anything this innovative, this quickly? It’s hard to say, but I don’t think our world would be anywhere near the same. Now companies are trying to emulate the way Jobs did his job. He revolutionized our world, the technology world, and the business world. Without him, people today might be satisfied with a phone that only….makes phone calls.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Ray C. Anderson
Ray Anderson, the CEO of Interface Global, has been publicly praised for his creative innovation and corporate sustainability efforts. Anderson, who passed away early this past August, led his carpet industry through a drastic redesign in the early 1990's. He embraced the idea of a "cradle-to-cradle" corporate strategy rather than an organizational structure that is centered around a "take-make-waste" mindset.
In a documentary that I watched of Anderson, it was easy to see why employees and consumers responded to him. Anderson stood behind and shaped Interface to become a company that was committed to environmental sustainability. It was clear through is speaking that Ray was a Transformational Leader.
While Anderson challenged and called his employees to more, it was clear throughout his career that he never asked anything of his followers that he had not already demonstrated. Recycling and being aware of conserving energy, bringing in more efficient lighting and energy saving equipment were some of the ways that Anderson implemented to create a more sustainable firm.
One of Anderson's employees was so moved by this movement that he wrote a poem about Anderson. Ray recites this poem during the majority of his broadcasts or speaking conventions. This was the poem:
Tomorrow's Child
Without a name; an unseen face
and knowing not your time nor place
Tomorrow’s Child, though yet unborn,
I met you first last Tuesday morn.
A wise friend introduced us two,
and through his sobering point of view
I saw a day that you would see;
a day for you, but not for me
Knowing you has changed my thinking,
for I never had an inkling
That perhaps the things I do
might someday, somehow, threaten you
Tomorrow’s Child, my daughter-son
I’m afraid I’ve just begun
To think of you and of your good,
Though always having known I should.
Begin I will to weigh the cost
of what I squander; what is lost
If ever I forget that you
will someday come to live here too.
The fact that Anderson inspired one of his employees so much that he wrote that poem speaks volumes of his character and ability to inspire movement in his followers. Anderson is a clear demonstration of Transformational Leadership and effective leadership in general.
Natalie Hess
In a documentary that I watched of Anderson, it was easy to see why employees and consumers responded to him. Anderson stood behind and shaped Interface to become a company that was committed to environmental sustainability. It was clear through is speaking that Ray was a Transformational Leader.
While Anderson challenged and called his employees to more, it was clear throughout his career that he never asked anything of his followers that he had not already demonstrated. Recycling and being aware of conserving energy, bringing in more efficient lighting and energy saving equipment were some of the ways that Anderson implemented to create a more sustainable firm.
One of Anderson's employees was so moved by this movement that he wrote a poem about Anderson. Ray recites this poem during the majority of his broadcasts or speaking conventions. This was the poem:
Tomorrow's Child
Without a name; an unseen face
and knowing not your time nor place
Tomorrow’s Child, though yet unborn,
I met you first last Tuesday morn.
A wise friend introduced us two,
and through his sobering point of view
I saw a day that you would see;
a day for you, but not for me
Knowing you has changed my thinking,
for I never had an inkling
That perhaps the things I do
might someday, somehow, threaten you
Tomorrow’s Child, my daughter-son
I’m afraid I’ve just begun
To think of you and of your good,
Though always having known I should.
Begin I will to weigh the cost
of what I squander; what is lost
If ever I forget that you
will someday come to live here too.
The fact that Anderson inspired one of his employees so much that he wrote that poem speaks volumes of his character and ability to inspire movement in his followers. Anderson is a clear demonstration of Transformational Leadership and effective leadership in general.
Natalie Hess
Michael Moore and Occupy Wall Street
Michael Moore became a celebrity by creating documentaries that speak for the American people. Moore has made a living writing books and making films that outline the pitfalls of governmental and social systems that he feels prohibit the growth and dominance of the United States. He has criticized every aspect of the American system, from the ever growing popularity of guns and violence in the US, to the globalization GM that took away jobs from the American public.
Making news headlines now is the movement that seems to be catching on all over the world. Yes, the Occupy Wall Street movement. Large groups of citizens in countries and cities all over the world are making their voices heard, and Moore is speaking with them.
One of the many reasons people are picketing in cities all over the United States is because they are sick of the greed that large corporations have brought into politics. Moore has made a point to publicly announce his dislike for the greed in corporate America, and the effect the greed has on the working class people of the United States. He has always been an advocate for the independence and strength of the American people over government institutions, and is joining the protest to express his beliefs on the pitfalls of our governmental institutions. During a recent interview on the CNN show Piers Morgan Tonight, Moore sits across from the host, Piers Morgan, and answers questions from a live audience. Piers Morgan Tonight usually does not have a live audience, but for the sake of Moore making sure that the public is represented, the live audience was allowed.
I have posted part one of Moore's interview on the show to help show just how much the American people have rallied behind him during this time of desperate hope for the country.
Moore's ability to be a spokesperson for the American people makes him a great shaper of public opinion.
He has rolled up his sleeves and has joined the protestors of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Now that the Occupy Wall Street movement is gaining steam, it is a prime opportunity for Moore to show his true leadership style to the protestors who agree with his opinions and beliefs.
Although authentic leadership has yet to be clearly conceptualized, the authentic leadership style can be tied to the way Moore stands up for the principles he believes in. When looking at authentic leadership characteristics, it seems as if Moore demonstrates all of them in his own unique way. He seems to always lead with conviction. He shares with everyone what he believes in, and will give solid reasoning as to why he feels that way. He is always genuine with the people. He makes sure people understand he is a United States citizen as well, and also understands all the parts that are wrong with our system. His originality is unquestioned. People love him or hate him. Regardless of what people think he shares his thoughts and firmly believes in what he thinks is right. Lastly, he is a model for the way he believes in. He makes sure he bases his actions on his values. He shares what he believes in and makes sure he acts in accordance with his views.
This also leaves some interesting questions. Is it strange that Michael Moore supports the 99%, when many people look at him as being in the 1%? Is there more he can be doing to make an impact for Occupy Wall Street? Are there other leadership styles he can demonstrate to help progress this movement? What makes Michael Moore such a popular figure when political and social issues gain media attention?
- Michael Mancuso Jr.
Making news headlines now is the movement that seems to be catching on all over the world. Yes, the Occupy Wall Street movement. Large groups of citizens in countries and cities all over the world are making their voices heard, and Moore is speaking with them.
One of the many reasons people are picketing in cities all over the United States is because they are sick of the greed that large corporations have brought into politics. Moore has made a point to publicly announce his dislike for the greed in corporate America, and the effect the greed has on the working class people of the United States. He has always been an advocate for the independence and strength of the American people over government institutions, and is joining the protest to express his beliefs on the pitfalls of our governmental institutions. During a recent interview on the CNN show Piers Morgan Tonight, Moore sits across from the host, Piers Morgan, and answers questions from a live audience. Piers Morgan Tonight usually does not have a live audience, but for the sake of Moore making sure that the public is represented, the live audience was allowed.
I have posted part one of Moore's interview on the show to help show just how much the American people have rallied behind him during this time of desperate hope for the country.
Moore's ability to be a spokesperson for the American people makes him a great shaper of public opinion.
He has rolled up his sleeves and has joined the protestors of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Now that the Occupy Wall Street movement is gaining steam, it is a prime opportunity for Moore to show his true leadership style to the protestors who agree with his opinions and beliefs.
Although authentic leadership has yet to be clearly conceptualized, the authentic leadership style can be tied to the way Moore stands up for the principles he believes in. When looking at authentic leadership characteristics, it seems as if Moore demonstrates all of them in his own unique way. He seems to always lead with conviction. He shares with everyone what he believes in, and will give solid reasoning as to why he feels that way. He is always genuine with the people. He makes sure people understand he is a United States citizen as well, and also understands all the parts that are wrong with our system. His originality is unquestioned. People love him or hate him. Regardless of what people think he shares his thoughts and firmly believes in what he thinks is right. Lastly, he is a model for the way he believes in. He makes sure he bases his actions on his values. He shares what he believes in and makes sure he acts in accordance with his views.
This also leaves some interesting questions. Is it strange that Michael Moore supports the 99%, when many people look at him as being in the 1%? Is there more he can be doing to make an impact for Occupy Wall Street? Are there other leadership styles he can demonstrate to help progress this movement? What makes Michael Moore such a popular figure when political and social issues gain media attention?
- Michael Mancuso Jr.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Al Gore's Climate Campaign Faces Uphill Battle
Almost lost in the shuffle of this latest recession, and with millions of Americans wondering where they will find a job at, remains the problem of global climate change. Al Gore, leader of the Climate Reality Project, is still traveling giving speeches about the importance of limiting and eventually eliminating the green house gases we put into the air everyday. Recently, a Gallup poll was released that said America's were more concerned about the state of our economy rather than our environment . Faced with these economic woes and an increasing amount of presidential hopefuls that are not yet convinced global climate change is a bad thing, Al Gore talks about some of these problems in an interview.
His response for people criticizing him for not doing enough I think says a lot about his leadership style, at least in this area. He says that he may not be the best showman for this message, but that does not make him the wrong showman for it either. He knows he has a great deal of knowledge on the topic and he can connect with people on a more personal level.
He goes on to make an interesting point regarding leadership styles. Sometimes, people are so against a message, that they start to dislike or even hate the speaker of the message. When this happens, and people will simply ignore the facts of an argument, Gore says you cannot feel frustrated, there is no time to be frustrated. You simply must move on to the next person and hope something else can change their mind.
While basically charged with leading this movement, as well as his own Climate Reality Project, Al Gore is an interesting case of someone who was once a leader with very high position power, being the Vice-president and almost the President as well, and turn that into extremely high personal power. However, as it is shown that can amount to a lot but it ultimately he cannot get what he wants down on just personal power alone.
Do you think Gore should step down a bit and allow a more charismatic voice to take over the global climate change podium? Is Gore spreading his message the right way or should he be more forceful with it? Do you think there are any ways of salvaging a relationship when a subordinate turns against not only your message but also turns on you as well?
Here's the link to the parent article - Al Gore Climate Change battle
Randall Smith
His response for people criticizing him for not doing enough I think says a lot about his leadership style, at least in this area. He says that he may not be the best showman for this message, but that does not make him the wrong showman for it either. He knows he has a great deal of knowledge on the topic and he can connect with people on a more personal level.
He goes on to make an interesting point regarding leadership styles. Sometimes, people are so against a message, that they start to dislike or even hate the speaker of the message. When this happens, and people will simply ignore the facts of an argument, Gore says you cannot feel frustrated, there is no time to be frustrated. You simply must move on to the next person and hope something else can change their mind.
While basically charged with leading this movement, as well as his own Climate Reality Project, Al Gore is an interesting case of someone who was once a leader with very high position power, being the Vice-president and almost the President as well, and turn that into extremely high personal power. However, as it is shown that can amount to a lot but it ultimately he cannot get what he wants down on just personal power alone.
Do you think Gore should step down a bit and allow a more charismatic voice to take over the global climate change podium? Is Gore spreading his message the right way or should he be more forceful with it? Do you think there are any ways of salvaging a relationship when a subordinate turns against not only your message but also turns on you as well?
Here's the link to the parent article - Al Gore Climate Change battle
Randall Smith
Monday, September 19, 2011
Oprah Winfrey gives back
It is hard to talk about the topic of celebrities leading change in communities without bringing up Oprah Winfrey. With her talk show alone, she has helped hundreds of people and raised awareness about tons of social issues a lot of American's face. Her network, the Angel Network sponsors charitable initiatives worldwide. She has championed many other campaigns as well. Initiatives like promoting literacy to speaking out against child abuse are just a few of the many issues Oprah raises about.
Oprah also started the Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls. The girls that are invited to attend the Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls have shown that they have the ability to excel, and to move beyond challenging circumstances.
"Every child has a right to an education, but to attend the Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls will be a privilege." Oprah often refers her girls to words by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., "My young friends, doors are opening to you – doors of opportunities that were not open to your mothers and fathers – and the great challenge facing you is to be ready to face these doors as they open.”
Oprah has used the experiences that she faced as a young girl to inspire others to succeed in conditions that should hold you down. She has inspired men and women of all ages for over a decade to be the kind of people that beat the odds over and over again.
Natalie Hess
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Jon Stewart's Television Agenda to Restore Sanity and/or Fear
Jon Stewart has given the American public a TV show that allows people to openly make jabs and speak freely towards their American democracy. An American Democracy that has been so nit-witted in their approach to put their country back on track to being the greatest in the world. Jon Stewart has been a pioneer in the world of bringing political satire and television together as a place to vent about the governments inability to do their jobs well.
When I look at one of Jon Stewart's most radical television movements to bring about change, I get reminded of his October of 2004 appearance on the CNN debate show Crossfire with Tucker Carlson. On the show, Stewart flips the script on the producers and points the basis of his arguments back on the show itself. Instead of being the comical funny-man, as he is on his own The Daily Show, his verbal attack stemmed from his opinion that the show did nothing to inform the people about current political news. The 14 minute long rant is posted below (for your viewing pleasure) and gives a glimpse into the personality traits that make Stewart a great shaper of public opinion.
After watching that Interview, I opened our class book and read a little more into the Trait Approach to see what important traits Stewart shows during his speech that made him come off as such a strong, informative leader of public opinion. Table 2.2 in our textbook (pg. 19) ,Leadership Theory and Practice by Peter G. Northouse, there are a list of 5 major leadership traits that "individuals hope to posses or wish to cultivate if they want to be perceived by others as leaders." Those traits are as follows: intelligence, self- confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability. It is hard to say that after watching Stewart verbally overthrow these CNN show hosts after 14 minutes that he lacks any of these important traits. He shows extreme intelligence about political theory and upkeep on current events. He is extremely self-confident in his ability to express his disgust for the talk show, and his opinion that their show is "hurting America" with their useless talk instead of honest debate. Stewart shows extreme integrity when comparing that his show is "introduced by puppets making crank calls", instead of their honest debate show airing on CNN. Although the book defines sociability as having "pleasant social relationships", Stewart did show sociability in the interview although I am sure the TV show hosts wouldn't summarize his guest appearance as very pleasant.
Stewart was able to sway public opinion so much that in January 2005, CNN president Jonathan Klein cancelled CNN's Crossfire show. Klein referenced Stewart's ability to make valid points about " the noise level of these types of shows, which does nothing to illuminate the issues of the day". Jon Stewart went out of his way to accept an invitation as a guest on a debate show, and the traits he brought to the show made his opinion heard, and ended up being a large part in the cancellation of the show. Was Stewart too tough on the Crossfire hosts? Was there something Stewart could have done more positively to get his point across? Was Stewart a good model in persuading public opinion? Was Stewart correct in the leadership action he took to express his dislike for the show? Many questions can be posed after watching the clip, but one thing is for certain, do not wear a bow-tie when you have a comedian on your talk show.
- Michael Mancuso Jr.
When I look at one of Jon Stewart's most radical television movements to bring about change, I get reminded of his October of 2004 appearance on the CNN debate show Crossfire with Tucker Carlson. On the show, Stewart flips the script on the producers and points the basis of his arguments back on the show itself. Instead of being the comical funny-man, as he is on his own The Daily Show, his verbal attack stemmed from his opinion that the show did nothing to inform the people about current political news. The 14 minute long rant is posted below (for your viewing pleasure) and gives a glimpse into the personality traits that make Stewart a great shaper of public opinion.
After watching that Interview, I opened our class book and read a little more into the Trait Approach to see what important traits Stewart shows during his speech that made him come off as such a strong, informative leader of public opinion. Table 2.2 in our textbook (pg. 19) ,Leadership Theory and Practice by Peter G. Northouse, there are a list of 5 major leadership traits that "individuals hope to posses or wish to cultivate if they want to be perceived by others as leaders." Those traits are as follows: intelligence, self- confidence, determination, integrity, and sociability. It is hard to say that after watching Stewart verbally overthrow these CNN show hosts after 14 minutes that he lacks any of these important traits. He shows extreme intelligence about political theory and upkeep on current events. He is extremely self-confident in his ability to express his disgust for the talk show, and his opinion that their show is "hurting America" with their useless talk instead of honest debate. Stewart shows extreme integrity when comparing that his show is "introduced by puppets making crank calls", instead of their honest debate show airing on CNN. Although the book defines sociability as having "pleasant social relationships", Stewart did show sociability in the interview although I am sure the TV show hosts wouldn't summarize his guest appearance as very pleasant.
Stewart was able to sway public opinion so much that in January 2005, CNN president Jonathan Klein cancelled CNN's Crossfire show. Klein referenced Stewart's ability to make valid points about " the noise level of these types of shows, which does nothing to illuminate the issues of the day". Jon Stewart went out of his way to accept an invitation as a guest on a debate show, and the traits he brought to the show made his opinion heard, and ended up being a large part in the cancellation of the show. Was Stewart too tough on the Crossfire hosts? Was there something Stewart could have done more positively to get his point across? Was Stewart a good model in persuading public opinion? Was Stewart correct in the leadership action he took to express his dislike for the show? Many questions can be posed after watching the clip, but one thing is for certain, do not wear a bow-tie when you have a comedian on your talk show.
- Michael Mancuso Jr.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)