Moral Values Then VS. Moral Values Now

Like some old crotchety dude sitting on his front porch bitching about how things were so much better back in his day I find myself wondering about the changing values of America and the results therein. It really is interesting how far we’ve come/gone from whence we came. But unlike the geezer on the porch I don’t long for times past and think, or at least say, that things were so much better back then. In some cases and instances they were better. In other instances we’re better off today.

Travel with me through the time machine and lets take a look back at how things used to be and what the changes have produced.

This protester was on his own and letting Minn...

How it used to be:

Gay marriage? Why yes. Everybody and I mean everybody was in favor of every marriage being gay. Used to be gay meant something completely different. In today’s context the question of Gay Marriage wasn’t a question at all. It was absurd. I mean really? A man marrying another man? A woman marrying another woman? What the heck are you talking about?

How it is today:

Currently six of the United States allow Gay Marriage, and the momentum clearly shows that list to be growing. Even in states that don’t currently recognize Gay Marriage homosexual domestic partnerships are not uncommon. And last week the President said he was in favor of legalizing Gay Marriage, though he hedged his bets for political reasons and said it was a issue for each state to resolve. (Once again Obama showing the conviction and backbone of a jellyfish)

The results:

Its way to early to offer an opinion on the evolving allowance for Gay Marriage. But its not too early to offer an opinion about the increasingly open subject of being Gay. As recently as 20 years ago it was a big deal when someone was “outed”, revealed publicly that they were homosexual. Now its not even a term people use. Now we discuss with serious straight faces gay children, as if an innocent child knows anything about sex or has an attraction one way or another. More open homosexuality goes hand in hand with more open sexuality.

The love of my life

How it used to be:

Living in sin, unwed! Used to be the idea of living with someone (of the opposite sex) with whom you weren’t married was completely taboo. You just didn’t do it! Because if you did…then…you could be…having sex!!!! OMG!

How it is today:

Really? This was an issue for…who? Men and women co-habitate all the time and its simply not an issue with anyone. And yes…they’re having sex.

The results: 

Certainly you have more children born to unwed parents. We’ve also seen a steady decline in the number of people getting and staying married. According to a Pew Research study published December 2011 shows that barely half of all adults are married, and the age at which both brides and grooms get married for the first time is at a record high age; 26.5 for brides, 28.5 for grooms. In 1960 70% of all adults in the U.S. 18 and older were married. Given that repeated studies show people tend to be happier, more successful, and less likely to be poor when married its hard to see this trend as anything but bad.

The Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana (w...

How it used to be:

Illegal drugs were thought to be dangerous, even marijuana, and addictive, even marijuana. But ever since most states started making various drugs illegal in the 1920s and 30s people have continued to use marijuana, cocaine, heroine, amphetamines and other drugs. Even Franklin Roosevelt‘s doctor gave the President small doses of cocaine to clear up our Chief Executive’s sinuses.

But in the Hardy Boys and later Happy Days world of the 50s, 60s and 70s drug use was for the people on the edges of society.

How it is today:

Because of our more open and informed society there is a perception that more and more of us use illegal drugs. Studies aren’t completely helpful on whether this is true or not. But certainly we’re more accepting of those who do. Legalizing marijuana efforts have been in existence since it became illegal in every U.S. state by the 1930s. They now seem to have more traction, with more and more states allowing for the medical use of marijuana.

A Gallup Poll in 1969  found that 4% of Americans age 12 or older had used pot. By 1977 that number was 24%. In a study reported by CNN in September last year 9% of Americans report using illegal drugs. It’s important to note the difference in the two things just written. The ’69 and ’77 studys merely reported on cannabis and whether a person had EVER tried it. The 2011 study reported on ALL illegal drugs and reported on how many people regularly use them.

About 200-million people use illegal drugs worldwide.

The results:

Illegal drugs cause 250,000 deaths worldwide each year. According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime that’s compared to 2.25-million killed from alcohol use, and 5.1-million killed from use of tobacco. But 2.1 million years of life were lost due to drug use, more than the 1.5 million lost due to alcohol, likely because drug deaths generally affect younger people, while alcohol deaths tend to occur in middle-aged and elderly people.

Cleavage

How it used to be:

Sex and all things related to it were private, not to be talked about publicly, and often not even between two consenting adults involved in sex. I’ve done enough genealogical research and seen enough episodes of NBC’s “Who do You Think You Are?” to know sexual relations involving non-married and married couples happened plenty in decades prior to the sexual revolution. But, again, it just wasn’t something people talked about.

Mike and Carol Brady of the 1970s TV show The Brady Bunch, were the first couple shown on TV in the same bed together. The show aired from September 1969 to March 1974.

How it is today:

A female friend recently happily admitted to me over lunch that she had another “friend with benefits”; referring to the now accepted practice of having a “Fuck-buddy“. For those not in the know this would be someone with whom you have sex regularly but are not married to and don’t even consider a boyfriend or girlfriend. There are two things to consider here:

1. That “friends with benefits” is so increasingly common that its an expression at all.

And

2. That a female friend happily and willingly admits to being engaged in such a relationship.

Both issues serve as metaphors for how sex is considered not such a big deal by so many people today.

A couple years ago while on a beer drinking expedition with several friends the discussion of sexual partners came up. I revealed that I’d had fewer than 10 sexual partners in my entire life. The reaction from my friends was equivalent to me saying I was a 50 year old virgin. They teased me incessantly the rest of the night. Of the three one was 26 years old, another was in his mid-30s, and another was 50 years old. The older guys were married but had been single for much of their life. Along with the 26 year old they all claimed to have had “well over” 100 sexual partners in their lives. The fact that I was dating my wife at age 20, and had remained happily married to her for over 25 years didn’t change the fact that in their eyes I was fresh and innocent.

But that being my perspective…sex is still a big deal to me. Were I to ever engage in it with someone other than my wife I can’t imagine it being merely casual. It would effect me very strongly emotionally.

The result:

The Centers for Disease Control says 41% of all births these days are to unwed mothers. Black babies are born to unwed mothers 72% of the time.

As The Heritage Foundation determined in a recent study publicly championed during the Presidential campaign of Rick Santorum if a person graduates high school, has a job, and waits until being married before having children they have a 98% likelihood of NEVER being in poverty throughout their entire lives.

This just in: sex creates babies! Of course there are all kinds of contraceptives and medical procedures designed to keep a woman from getting pregnant. But most of them are dependent on the user actually using the contraceptive. And we know from recent news stories that money is not an issue. Contraception is easily acquired in this country. But yet we still keep having babies in less than optimal circumstances.

And the transmission of Sexually Transmitted Diseases is a national crisis according to the Center for Disease Prevention. There are over 19-million STD infections in this country costing the U.S. health care system over $17-Billion each year. 

So a more open society on the subject of sex has done….what? Created more unwanted pregnancy, more unwanted children, and more diseases; including AIDS. The positives, besides the fact that sex is fun and great in so many ways? Well, I don’t know. What do YOU think?

Many other things have changed from way back when until now. But these have been in the news a lot lately, AND I honestly believe these are the big ones.

Brunswick Church (Presbyterian), known locally...

How it used to be:

Roman Catholics make up the most populous church in America. In 1955 75% of Catholics attended church weekly. According to Gallup only 42% of those who claimed a Protestant faith attended church weekly in 1955. Twenty-percent of Americans never attended church, mosque, or synagogue.

How it is today:

According to a Gallup Poll Catholic’s weekly church attendance has leveled off over the past 15 years, to about 45%. Protestant church attendance climbed slightly since 1955 to 45%. Twenty percent of Americans never go to church, a percentage that has remained unchanged for nearly 60 years (despite constant efforts by atheists to make church-going seem like the act of crazy people).

Perhaps not surprising is the fact that those who call themselves Conservative attend church more than any of 28 named sub-groups; and of those 28, Liberals attend church the least.

The result:

Other than Catholics the percentage of people attending church has not changed much in nearly 60 years. But the drop-off from those affiliated with the Catholic church has been dramatic; and since it is the most populous church in the country such a drop-off can’t be ignored.

Is it correct to say that those who are more likely to use drugs and advocate their legalization, those who advocate Gay marriage, those more likely to live out-of-wedlock and have kids out of wedlock, and those advocating a more openly sexual world tend to be liberal more-so than they tend to be Conservative? If that assumption is true (and I think that generally speaking there is no doubt that its true) can it be too much of a surprise that these people are also more likely to not attend church?

A March 2012 Gallup poll indicates that those who go to church are happier, more often. Church attendees give to charities more readily, and lead more successful, fulfilling lives…generally speaking, according to a study published in Canada.

What I find shocking is that these figures need to be reported at all. It seems obvious to me, and has for a very long time.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Legalize Marijuana? Let’s take a Deep Breath

Fast Times at Ridgemont High

The momentum to legalize marijuana is undeniable and likely to happen nationwide in the next 5-10 years. The question is: how wise a decision is it?

Five years ago I probably would have come down pretty firmly on the side of legalization. After all, Weed is largely safe of detrimental health risks that are much more common with other illegal drugs like cocaine, and heroine. I don’t ever remember hearing of a reported death from overdosing on pot. On the other hand death from acute alcohol poisoning is not uncommon, and alcohol is a legal drug. Besides death alcohol abuse is well-known to cause innumerable problems.

But is the imminent possibility of death from over-use the only reason to make a drug illegal? The answer is obviously No. Regular marijuana use causes its users to lose motivation, drive, goals, aspirations and work ethic. It’s also well documented that pot is a gateway drug that leads far too many users to the more dangerous drugs.

Marijuana growing Islamabad 01

Marijuana growing Islamabad 01 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

On the first point, a study is hardly needed. The loose, brain-dead pot smoker is so stereotypical its a cliche`. It’s a cliche` most frequently represented by the portrayal of the fictional Jeff Spicoli, by Sean Penn,

Sean Penn at the premier for Milk at the Castr...

Sean Penn 

in the 1982 movie Fast Times at Ridgemont High:

Do we want a nation of Spicoli’s?

The fact that a regular use of Mary-Jane can diminish drive and work ethic is not without documentation or plenty of examples. I’ve been witness myself to a straight “A” student catching the “pot” habit and slowly decreasing into such a state of lethargy that their high school grades diminished to a point where they failed to graduate; something 75% of all kids manage.

Were pot legalized another big question is whether the number of users would remain as-is or increase. Put simply, would you not smoke pot if it remained illegal, but choose to do so if it were legal? I think the obvious answer is many would. I’d be one of them. My history with pot is minimal. I’m not sure that I ever bought even a gram. But in my youth I wouldn’t turn it down if it were offered. That stopped for me at the age of 19. At that young age I determined I had too many vices and committed to eliminate some. It made sense to make one of them that which is illegal. In the nearly 30 years since I made that decision I’ve partaken in a little pot only a hand full of times, and only when sex was imminent. So sue me. Sex is GREAT when high on weed.

Leaf of Cannabis עברית: עלה של קנביס

Another reason to oppose marijuana legalization is the fact that it is addictive. Legalization advocates can argue all they want that it’s not. But common sense and repeated studies prove otherwise.

The debate extends far beyond the minimal points that can be made in this blog. But for my part the momentum to legalize is so omnipresent that I felt a moment of pause to recognize there really are detrimental effects to such a move and taking a deep breath is appropriate. A deep, clean breath.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Take Responsibility! Your Kid is Fat. It’s YOUR Fault.

What scientists call "Overweight" ch...

Personal responsibility is a character trait increasingly hard to find in people of this country. The people of the United States have completely fallen for our “leader’s” efforts to “help” you every time an accident happens, or a negative trend is discovered, or a problem occurs. It’s always someone else’s fault.

A growing and popular topic of discussion in this country is childhood obesity; a problem so pervasive and threatening that we could be raising the first generation ever to have a shorter life expectancy. It’s a war that has drawn the attention of former President Bill Clinton, current First Lady Michelle Obama, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and many others. It’s a serious problem. But if you want to find who or what’s responsible for your child’s heft…go no further than the nearest mirror.

CBS News reported yesterday that a key drug used for adults with Type 2 diabetes, Metformin, was largely ineffective in treating children with Type 2 diabetes. The drug is supposed to help control sugar levels in blood. Obesity is a leading cause of Type 2 diabetes in kids and adults. Since 1980 obesity in children has almost tripled, to over 12.5-million. In the CBS report the studies Director says “If we can prevent them (children) from getting diabetes that would be far preferable than being in a position of treating it.” Doctor Robin Goland correctly points out that historically kids didn’t get Type 2 diabetes. When, and if a child got diabetes it was Type 1, which has little or nothing to do with obesity. Diabetes creates a host of medical problems including poor circulation, blindness, and kidney disease.

In related news a new study reported on by the New York Times discloses that the claims of urban residents around our country being nutritionally disadvantaged because of a lack of stores providing fresh fruits and vegetables is an urban myth, not urban desert. The urban food desert myth was given lots of credibility by…wait for it…First Lady Michelle Obama.

First Lady Michelle Obama

First Lady Michelle Obama (Photo credit: West Point Public Affairs)

I for one am glad Mrs. Obama cares for us all and emphasizes healthy eating and physical activity. It would just be more helpful if she knew what she was talking about. The article in the NY Times reports that two recent studies have been done about the supposed lack of nutritional foods in poor urban environments, “But two new studies have found something unexpected. Such neighborhoods not only have more fast food restaurants and convenience stores than more affluent ones, but more grocery stores, supermarkets and full-service restaurants, too.” So with availability no longer an issue who’s to blame for kids lack of proper diet and their subsequent obesity? Here’s a hint…they got their money for that McDonald’s Super Sized Bic Mac Meal from Mom or Dad, same as yesterday, and the day before and the day before that.

City Road McDonalds The famous golden arches b...

And lets stop blaming McDonald’s and other fast food establishments for our kids being fat. As Bill Wittle explained in a video blog we posted a couple of weeks ago called, Why It Sucks to Be Conservative, all McDonald’s does is open up for business. It’s something they have been doing with largely the same menu for sixty years. Remember when we were kids and Mom and Dad took us to McDonald’s? It was special and exciting? Why? Because it didn’t happen all that often. For me if I got McDonald’s food twice in a month I was fortunate. Now, it’s not unusual for many families to visit the drive-thru two-three-four times per week. We can’t do that to our kids and not have them suffer the ill effects. Let me remind you, they don’t have the money or the car to take them to McDonald’s. You do. You are also the one whose responsibility it is to say NO when the kids ask. Grow a backbone and do so.

Years ago I heard a news report on the radio in which the anchor told the listeners of a study, a multi-million dollar study that concluded obese people were obese because they ate more than the rest of us. Do we really need a study to come to this conclusion?

Used to be a common refrain from social critics was “how much time kids spent in front of the tv”. Well, I don’t hear that too often anymore, though I suspect its more of a concern. Between sitting in front of a tv show, video games and computers your kids are probably more inactive than they used to be. Combine that with the fear of letting them out of your sight and your kids are zombies compared to our youth. And we watched tons of TV, didn’t we? Telling your kids to “go outside and play” may seem like a punishment to them, sometimes. But you are doing them a big favor.

In this as in most all things your Mom or Dad were right when they told you “all things in moderation”. I personally don’t have a problem with buying my kids “junk” food, any kind of junk food. But eaten in moderation it’s not going to kill your kids. Too much of a “good” thing definitely will. And I certainly don’t mind being the bad guy (when my kids were younger) and telling them to go outside and play. The life you create for them through a little more attention being paid to the things you limit will be so much more healthy and full filling and they’ll be thankful too.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Radio’s Failures

Samsung Galaxy Tab showing its Wikipedia article.

Samsung Galaxy Tab

 

This morning as I sat in my canoe while fishing a nearby lake I placed headphones in my ears and listened to radio stations in Los Angeles, Tampa, Detroit, and Chicago on my Samsung Galaxy Tab with Android operating system. It caused me to think of the industry in which I’ve worked continuously since 1985. It caused me to think of radio’s failures.

For more than sixty years pundits have been predicting the death of radio as an information and entertainment medium. They began with the popularity of television. Predictions that radio was on its way out continued with every new audio technology that was introduced since that time. Time and again the pundits have been wrong. Radio has not only survived but thrived through all technology updates, twists and turns. Radio has also pressed on in spite of a constantly changing and finicky population that in the past sixty years grew increasingly young and now grows increasingly old.

Prior to televisions dominance radio was the medium for entertainment, news, and sports for Americans for more than 30 years.  Westinghouse’s KDKA radio in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania began successful commercial radio broadcasting in November 1920. And while television had many fathers, and many starts dating back to a time around 1908 the start of coast-to-coast network television in the United States didn’t begin until 1951. As late as 1947 there were 40 million radios in the U.S. and only 44,000 televisions (30k in the greater New York area). While only 0.5% of U.S. households had a television set in 1946, 55.7% had one in 1954, and 90% by 1962. And the death of radio was first predicted.

Try as it might though, television couldn’t compete with radio in two critical areas; immediacy and local community service and/or interest. A radio station could adequately serve the needs of small towns with as few as 2-3000 people. Many still do today. And radio could report the news immediately from almost any location in the world, or right down the street. As early as the 1940s all you needed was a telephone line ultimately connecting you to the radio station or radio network in order to transmit your story. The reports from England by

Edward R. Murrow, pioneer in broadcast journalism

Edward R. Murrow, pioneer in broadcast journalism

Edward R. Murrow back to the United States via radio broadcasts during the World War II Battle of Britain were so dramatic Murrow became a star and a hero. Television couldn’t duplicate such transmission capabilities until almost 10 years later when the same Edward R. Murrow in his show See it Now became the first to show a simultaneous broadcast from Atlantic and Pacific Coasts.

Radio became a staple in the assembly of automobiles beginning in 1922. According to the book “Chronicle of the American Automobile over 100 Years of Auto History,” it was possible to buy a 1922 Chevrolet with a Westinghouse radio installed. But by the 60s 8-tracks and then by the 70s cassette tape players were introduced and radio’s death knell was sounded again. The tape players were small and convenient enough to fit into cars. So, of course, why would people listen to radio when they could listen to their own selection of audio tapes. Only…they did.

Portable listening devices, like the

Members of the Sony Walkman line of products; ...

Members of the Sony Walkman line of products; photo by Marc Zimmermann

Sony Walkman in the 1980s and the Apple iPod in 2001 were also supposed to provide enough listening choices to the average person that radio would not possibly survive. Only…it did. In fact, in a study published on our company website, Total Broadcasting Service, an October 2011 Arbitron survey indicates that radio is still the dominant device listened to in cars over CD players or any other device.

Sadly though, radio and the Federal Government began the slow burial of my beloved industry in the mid-1980s. Automated equipment made it easy and cheap to run a radio station. So station owners began sacrificing the live real human being radio personalities in favor of pre-recorded, pre-planned formated music stations. I worked for one myself in 1986-1988. I was News Director at KBSN AM/KDRM FM Moses Lake. KBSN was a live, local, full-service radio station with personalities, music, news and sports and it was very successful. KDRM played soft-rock, adult-contemporary music off of huge reel-to-reel tape machines all day and night. The only time the music was interrupted was when pre-recorded commercials played 4 times per hour for 3 minute breaks. Or when my own voice was inserted into one of the commercial breaks with a prerecorded newscast. KDRM was boring to the listener. But because it was so cheap to operate more and more radio station owners put-out a boring product.

By the 90s satellite technology had grown to such a level that radio networks began airing national radio programs at all hours of the day and night all over the country further eroding radio’s other advantage over all other mediums, local-community service and/or representation. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 opened the door for corporate raiders to sweep up radio stations in small towns and large cities. Since 1934 no single entity could own more than one AM radio station, FM station, television station and newspaper in a single media market. After ’96 they could own as many as their bankrolls could allow. While such deregulation was a boon to capitalism and in line with the principle of free-markets, it was a horrible blow to democracy. It eliminated the voice of thousands of small business owners in communities all over our great country and left us with a few selection of flavors for radio listening, and news chosen for us by corporate big wigs thousands of miles away from the listeners they were supposed to be serving.

Not surprisingly the continuing elimination of people from broadcasting erodes the talent pool from which real live honest to goodness radio personalities are selected and groomed. Remember when all radio voices had a vocal quality that was special? Remember the classic full sounding, warm radio voice? Today I hear narrow high treble, low bass voices with little poetic quality. I am horrified to hear a reporter on Seattle’s KOMO AM 1000 with a lisp, a clearly audible lisp. Before the days of political correctness we called it a speak impediment.

Radio Tower Graphic

Radio Tower Graphic (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Even with the advent of mobile internet technology terrestrial radio (that’s a modern term referring to old-fashioned radio) still possesses the same advantages over television and even the internet that kept it alive through the past sixty years of frontal assault from technology and government. It can still be more immediate and local than any other medium. These are valuable and marketable attributes, but they’re attributes corporate owners no longer recognize and government officials no longer seem to value. Until they do I’m doomed to spend my life growing old listening to audio over the mobile internet from cities far far away on devices that cost me hundreds of dollars, rather than good quality local radio announcers bringing news and sports from my own town on radios, small convenient, quality, inexpensive radios. Radio is free and can be listened to free on comparatively inexpensive devices. Let’s hope as Americans we won’t learn to take it for granted be you a radio station owner or a radio listener.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Pinterest and the Madness that is Social Media

Red Pinterest logo

Red Pinterest logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

First there was MySpace.

Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Facebook

Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Facebook (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

In 2004 Facebook was created and after a few years went cruising by MySpace like it was standing still. YouTube went online in 2005. And somewhere thereafter came a host of internet social media sites like LinkedIn, Biznik, and Twitter. Internet behemoth Google is trying desperately to make Google + a player. And they have the resources to do so. For now Facebook is the undisputed King of social media; and YouTube the number 1 challenger.

But a new player on the stage has surged past Google +, Twitter and all the others. Since its launch in March 2010 Pinterest has surpassed all but Facebook and YouTube in popularity on the internet. Pinterest is an online bulletin board in which members post pictures and videos of things that interest them. It’s supposed to be a non-business site, so don’t tell them what we’re doing there. And don’t tell what Coca Cola, Starbucks and a countless number of other large and small businesses are doing “pinning” the things that interest them, including coupons, discounts, and other incentives designed to get you to buy their products.

What’s all this mean for the overwhelmed small business owner who can barely comprehend the concept of marketing at all, let alone online or social media marketing? The answer will be different for every person. But if you’re a business owner or a commissioned sales person (in which case you are your own business owner whether you know it or not) it’s not wise to ignore the potential social media and Pinterest in particular may represent.

At this time in my life and for the previous eleven years teenage kids have been part of my life since before there was social media. So I’ve known of the concept of social media for 6-7 years. But I didn’t get started on it officially until May 8, 2008 when I opened an account on Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn and Biznik.com all in the same day. I had attended a seminar at the Master Builders Association offices in Bellevue, WA conducted by two serious networkers I’d come to know. They enlightened me to the necessity for a smart business person, especially one engaged in networking, to be on Facebook and Biznik. Sadly, while they convinced me of the need to be on social media; they didn’t tell me what to do once I got there. So I languished.

My Facebook Timeline clearly confirms what I remember. I made no posts there from May 2008 until October 2008. And then I only made three posts all month. I had almost no Friends. Then one high school friend asked me to be friends, via Facebook notification email. I happily accepted. Within days I had close to 1-hundred friends. Let the posting begin. And did it ever. Very quickly Facebook became a daily must. My wife thought I was nuts. She only joined Facebook in 2010. Now she’s on more than me.

My company Facebook page, Total Broadcasting Service, didn’t come into existence until August 2009 when continuing my networking pursuits through Biznik, mostly, I continued to learn more and more on how to make social media work for my business. When Twitter became all the rage in 2009 and 2010 I resisted. Frankly, I hadn’t seen much direct business coming my way via these venues and was skeptical of Twitter’s capacity to help me grow my business. Finally in March 2010 I joined Twitter and posted on Facebook that I had done so. In the week that followed I’d never had so many visits to my company website. Another class in March 2011 taught me about @ and # on Twitter, and how to connect them all and once again the visits to my website spiked.

twitter logo map 09

Now when I post anything to my company Facebook page it’s instantly re-posted on Twitter, LinkedIn, MySpace, Biznik, and back on my Facebook personal profile Wall.

Español: Logo Vectorial de YouTube

When I Like or Favorite or upload a video on YouTube a link to the video is immediately posted on Twitter and subsequently onto Facebook. Creating the Twitter link to all these sites makes it a lot easier to have each one regularly updated through a single post on a single site. It’s very convenient and very necessary to update your social media in order to maintain and grow your Likes, and Followers and with it your business.

After several years our efforts are starting to pay off for Total Broadcasting Service. We’re received more and more referrals and direct business from social media in the past six months than the rest of these years combined. In our dealings with customers, other business owners, I remain stunned at how few make any effort at all on social media. It’s a mistake they won’t realize fully until the economy gets up to full speed again, and those without a well established presence on the internet will be left in the dust.

Currently Pinterest membership is made up 85% by women. Of those women 77% are between the ages of 25-54. Early indications for business are than Pinterest drives more people to a company’s website than to its Facebook page. When you Pin something to your bulletin board you can attach your website to it. Then, whenever and however many times that Pin is “Re-Pinned” by others your website URL goes with it. Such spiderweb links are precisely what SEO experts will tell you are mandatory to improve your company website’s search engine results.

Pinterest still has some growing to do. You must be invited in order to join. And that can take a few days and there are some whose self-invitations are denied, for reasons that are left unexplained. Pinterest still has no mobile app for anything other than the iPhone. And I gotta tell ya, if you are not a woman…well…lets just say…I don’t get it yet. But….4 years ago I was saying the same thing about Facebook, and 2 years ago I was saying the same thing about Twitter. Maybe your interest will peak faster than mine. Then again, maybe you’re a woman.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.