It could easily have derailed into an overloaded recitation of work at any big construction site. Instead, Money uses a journalistic eye to highlight details. He informs and entertains, keeping the story moving smoothly along the tracks.
Use his approach as a how-to guide in writing your own blog posts.
Money pulls readers into the construction zone, inviting them to ponder what it’s like working with Highway 401 traffic zooming behind their backs. It’s Canada’s busiest highway roaring beside workers toiling on Canada’s busiest railway corridor.
Money efficiently and confidently explains the what and the why. What’s happened and what’s next. Descriptions are clear and vivid. He focuses on the change and why it’s important. And he salts the prose with a dash or two of railway jargon and dinosaur reference to help readers wrap their minds around the magnitude of the project.
Did you read all the way to the end of his blog post?
“There is no sincerer love than the love of food.”
George Bernard Shaw
I agree. But why do I like certain foods? And not others?
Not to worry: I never let such thoughts interrupt my eating.
It seems I’m not alone in my pondering over puddings, potatoes or perogies.
Scientists also take a keen interest in what we eat and how we eat and what it all means.
Here’s a taste of what I’ve uncovered about how people interact with food. Maybe it will help me prepare for my next dinner gathering.
When you pick up a gingerbread man, do you rip off his head first?
Guess what: that probably means you’re a leader.
Seriously.
According to Dr. Alan Hirsch, Neurological Director of the Smell and Taste Treatment and Research Foundation in Chicago, the first bite of the cookie can provide insight your underlying personality. He says so in 2010 research on behalf of Dunkin Donuts.
Here’s how the cookie crumbles.
Heat bite first? “It indicates an achievement-oriented individual, a natural leader, who won’t take no for an answer,” he says.
Go for the right arm off the top? You’re skeptical and pessimistic.
Left arm? Creative and extroverted.
Amputate the legs in a pre-emtive strike? Good news, my friend: “you tend to be more sensitive, reveling in the company of others”
I wonder what psychiatrist Sigmund Freud would say about all this.
Maybe a gingerbread man should come with a little couch. And a free counselling session?
What to drink with our cookies?
How about some wine? Don’t laugh. I’ve done it.
It turns out wine drinkers have a tough time figuring out how much they actually pour, compared to what they planned. So say researchers at Cornell University. They have a wine program there.
I haven’t been able to sort out if red wine is indeed better than white wine. But I have found out if you drink white wine, you will probably pour more than you think you did.
Researchers told college students in the test to pour a standard wine serving. That’s five ounces.
Then, researchers put 10-ounce glasses in front of them. No, the college students didn’t all pour 10 ounces.
On average, white wine drinkers tended to pour about 10 percent more wine than did students with red wine bottles. Average pour was around five-point-five ounces. That’s better than I would do.
The reason? The low colour contrast of white wine in a clear glass can make it difficult to choose the appropriate level.
Those same researchers – after pouring wine all day long — also discovered that the style of glass you use is important to how much you think you pour.
People also tend to pour about 12 percent more wine – red or white — in a wide, red wine glass. People tend to consistently pour less wine into in narrow, white wine glasses.
It seems most people can’t calculate volumes in their heads. Instead, they think a narrower glass gets fuller faster, as the level rises faster. At least the first time they pour.
And people tend to pour about 10 percent more wine into a glass held into someone’s hand. Moving target, perhaps?
When drinking wine in moderation, here’s the checklist:
Stick to red wine
Pour it into a narrow, white wine glass.
And make sure the glass sitting on the table when you do.
That’s a lot to remember. Maybe it’s time to consider other popular beverages instead.
But here’s hoping you don’t like both coffee and dark, bitter beers like I do.
Apparently, liking both beer and coffee makes me a psychopath. Researchers have found people who like bitter foods were also more likely to score highly in measures of psychopathy, sadism, and aggression.
“Taken together, the results suggest that how much people like bitter-tasting foods and drinks is stably tied to how dark their personality is,” the study says.
Apparently, an affinity for bitter foods was a better predictor of personality than any of the other tastes in the research effort. Like sweet. Or sour.
With all that in mind, let’s plan my next dinner party.
To get a good reading on the personalities of everyone who arrives, I’ll pass out gingerbread men at the door. Then watch carefully. And take a few notes.
As a responsible host, I’ll pull aside the “leaders,” ask them set aside their decapitated cookies, and ask them to pour white wine. Only into narrow glasses sitting on the table, so nobody drinks too much.
If people start asking for coffee or dark beer, I’ll be extra careful where I put the little seating cards around the table. I’ll make sure to mix up the psychopaths with sensitive, amicable guests still munching on the legs of the gingerbread men.
What could go wrong?
And after all that, I’ll hope people really like my meatloaf. Inoffensive, comfort food. A warm hug kind of meal.
Fake news has been around long before social media empowered it.
Every time I hear people talk about how artificial intelligence will save us humans from fake news, I get uneasy.
It’s an appealing idea. People blame social media and Google (on computers) for the unchecked spread of fake information (via computers) and demand the tech companies (computer experts) do something about the problem on social media and Google (those darn computers!).
So tech companies announce they’ll use artificial intelligence (AI, or computers that learn) protect us from all the bad fake news filling our social media feeds (on the little computers we keep in our pockets).
The Waterloo, Canada company wants to good by making AI do good for us dumb humans. What’s not clear to me is how much the new AI is a partner with humans in identifying fake news. Or it is simply going to decide what’s truth for us?
My fear is many people worried about fake news will grasp at new AI technology, and let computers solve our problems. Except that it’s people creating and profiting from fake news by encouraging people to use computers to solve all our problems. And they’re using AI to create more fake news, too. Awkward.
Fake news was around long before computers and artificial intelligence. People have long twisted the truth, stirred negative emotions and counted on entrenched group think to spread their version of “truth.” Think rumor and innuendo. Malicious gossip on the schoolyard. Political and corporate propaganda. None of that will magically disappear when mercenary AI-powered truth detectors start scrubbing junk news from our computer screens.
The only way I know to find truth is to question everything I see and hear. What’s the source? What emotion does the “news” I am told stir inside me? What aren’t I being told? Who benefits from the story I’m being told?
If a news story stirs negative emotion in me and offers a simple answer to complex problems, I go on Fake News Alert.
In 30 years as a newspaper journalist, I learned questions are wonderful things. So is a healthy skepticism of everything I see and hear. Neuroscientist Daniel J. Levitin writes about how easy it is to trick our brains if we aren’t careful. I’m a fan of his book “A Field Guide to Lies” (also published as “Weaponized Lies”) and encourage everyone to read it. Here’s a video of Levitin speaking at Google (and I appreciate that irony):
I’m all for fighting fake news with all the tools smart and inventive people are able to develop. What I am not ready to yet do is blindly trust technology to protect us from fake news. That’s the same complacency purveyors of fake news count on to enable their strategies.
Sifting truth from facts is work. Sometimes hard work. And it’s worth it.
I have no plans to outsource the job and blithely trust someone else — or something else — to interpret what’s truth or lies.
What do you think about fighting fake news with artificial intelligence?
‘Most of the successful people I’ve known are the ones who do more listening than talking.
Bernard Baruch
I encourage you to listen – really listen – to someone today.
Yes, it’s easy to say. And hard to do.
When was the last time you felt someone listened to you? Heard you? Really heard what you were saying?
And when was the last time you really listened to what someone was saying? Really listened? Really heard what someone else was saying – and didn’t interrupt or try to change their minds?
Last day? Last week? Last month? Ever?
And how did you feel after that conversation?
When I have a good conversation – and keep my mouth shut for most of it – I feel energized. I feel confident. And since I’ve been listening, there’s was a good chance I learned something.
For me, listening to someone is a fundamental offer of respect. In fact, I like to be treated just that way.
Talk less, listen more
So I promote an 80:20 conversation rule. That’s 80 percent listening; 20 percent talking.
And, yes, I don’t meet my standard as often as I would like.
‘If you aspire to be a good conversationalist, be an attentive listener. To be interesting, be interested.
My thoughts and responses want to bubble up. I want to be heard. After all, it’s all about me. That’s what social media and celebrity worship teaches me to be successful. Right?
Well, no.
I remember both my grandmothers telling me that I’ve got two ears and one mouth. So listen twice as much as I speak.
I believe listening is about building people up. I succeed when others succeed.
Easy to say, hard to do. I find it takes practice and self-awareness. It is worth the effort.
Set a goal to have a conversation with someone. Pick a place where there are no interruptions.
Turn off your phone. Put it away out of sight.
Offer your complete attention. At a business meeting. Backyard barbecue. Over a coffee.
Make sure to get your head in the game. Use active listening skills. Forget having to “be right” about everything – or anything. You’re listening. Not lecturing.
Perhaps start by talking first, then let go. Ask about what they think about something in the news? Ask them what made them happy today? How are things going?
Let them know you want to hear what they say. Prove it by your actions.
Talk about what they want to talk about, not what you want to talk about.
Be ready with open-ended questions. What’s next? How did that happen? Wow! What can you do about that?
Be wary of making it an interrogation. Especially if someone starts to open up about personal, private worries.
Don’t interrupt
Never interrupt. Instead, empathize. Don’t criticize.
Mirror your partner’s body language. Keep eye contact when they’re talking – listen with your eyes.
To keep someone talking – especially in a conversation that’s leaning toward an argument – try echoing what they say. Show you understand. That you want to hear more. And aren’t telling them what to do.
“This is so frustrating and upsetting,” you might hear.
“You’re frustrated and upset,” you might reply.
“Yes — it is so frustrating but I think I can…” you might hear as the conversation continues.
You listened. Your conversational partner is empowered. I suggest you’ll be remembered.
Silence is golden
My favourite conversational tactic is silence. I often frame it with a gentle nod. Sometimes I purse my lips a little as I lean a little closer.
Silence during an interview was one of my go-to tactics as a newspaper reporter for 30 years. Ask an awkward, open-ended question. The other person answers. Then I don’t immediately ask another question.
Let conversational anxiety nudge your partner to respond and fill the silence. Golden.
Try slipping a little silence into your next a friendly conversation — or carefully into a disagreement.
It’s a tool to be used with tact in a full-blown family fight. I don’t advise glaring at your spouse with your mouth closed during an argument. Based on personal experience, that’s not a communication tactic likely to produce an amenable response.
Now, after all that talk about listening to build up other people, I have a confession.
I like a good conversation because it usually builds me up just as much as my conversational partner. And in truth, it’s a way to build my network of people. Perhaps advance my career. Boost my ego.
To be, dare I say, admired as someone who listens. Someone who is remembered.
Beyond that, I am convinced listening trains me to better control and enjoy my life.
It’s confidence practice. Exercising my inner virtues.
I can’t control what people say. I can only control my response.
Here’s something amazing. I’ve noticed that sometimes after I’ve listened to someone
I changed my mind. Yes, it really happens. I realized I was wrong. Or at least not right.
So, I encourage daily exercise of conversational skills by keeping quiet. Training for self-confidence. So you’re remembered.
Keeping quiet allows you to be heard.
What tactics do you use to enable and sustain great conversations?
