An insider's statement about politicians, their promises and lies -- or "Rudy didn’t even care enough about conservatives to lie to us"

In an fascinating news analysis in today's New York Times, "For Giuliani, a Dizzying Free-Fall for Ex-Mayor Who Seemed to Have It All" by reporters Michael Powell and Michael Cooper, there was an amazing quote from a Republican insider:

“It bordered on science fiction to think that someone as liberal on as many issues as Rudy Giuliani could become the Republican nominee,” said Nelson Warfield, a Republican consultant who has been a longtime critic of the former mayor. “Rudy didn’t even care enough about conservatives to lie to us. The problem wasn’t the calendar; it was the candidate.”

Let me highlight the essential part of Warfield's quote: "Rudy didn’t even care enough about conservatives to lie to us." (Check it out yourself here.)

In other words, it's okay, even expected, that politicians will lie to their constituencies -- but that's because it shows voters that the politicians care enough to pander to them. If politicians don't lie to show they care, they won't get the support from voters (who recognize they're not being lied to.)

That's a Catch-22 that even Joseph Heller could appreciate.

Rules for "American Idol"

It's that time of year...time to see how many Americans really have no singing talent. But are deluded enough to think they deserve a shot at being a celebrity.

I'm talking about the auditions part of the program.

I am not a big fan, and have only watched one season through the end. But I've seen enough audition episodes to identify some basic ground rules to get a yellow ticket to Hollywood. Ignore them at your peril.

• Have some real singing talent.
• Seriously, dude, have some talent. It helps if you actually have a regular place to sing that isn't the shower.
  
• Do not sing a a signature song from Mariah Carey or other diva. Not because you can't compete with her voice; perhaps you can. Don't do it because doing so gives judge Randy Jackson the opportunity to talk about how he knows Mariah and how he produced Mariah. Even if you're good, he's not going to like you. It's just not worth it. Sing another song.
• Do not sing a song made famous by an American Idol winner or runner up. They've already heard the song about a million times. Sung better, too.
  
• Do not sing a song you've written yourself. It's difficult for the judges to determine if you're a good singer if they don't know the song. Also, only freaks sing their own songs during auditions.
• Have an interesting back story to tell. If you're any good, the producers will help you polish it. But be careful: there's a line between really interesting and, um, singing a song you wrote.
  
• Do not bring any show-and-tell items. People have brought in fans, posters, photos of their students -- things that take time away from the main point of the proceedings: to determine whether or not you deserve a trip to Hollywood. There may be exceptions, but if you bring life accessories into the audition room, it's a safe bet that your so-called singing talent isn't what you think it is. Not surprisingly, the people I saw who expected to do some show-and-tell included people who sang their own songs.
• Ignore Ryan Seacrest. Sure he may act like he's your friend before you enter the audition room, but he's not. His so-called job is to inject some sort of tension into the audition process. Being friends with him does not help you get to Hollywood. If you get selected for Hollywood, you should be polite of course, but he's not your friend.
  
• Ignore Simon. He may get the most attention, but the most important judge for you to impress is Randy Jackson. The reason: Paula pretty much votes in a block with Randy. You only need two judges to say yes to get to Hollywood; if Randy says yes, start packing, dawg.
• If all three judges say no, it's okay to tear up, but do not lose control. Especially don't start cursing out Simon and the rest of the judges. The producers have complete control: they will bleep your voice, cover your mouth with an Idol logo (to prevent us from hearing what kind of, um, uh, person you think Simon is), and can make you look like a deranged freak. If that's really you're goal, you can get a lot more airtime on other programs. Save the effort for a program and audience that really cares, like Jerry Springer.

Good luck!

The Forbes Fictional 15 -- I am not making this up

The media has a fascination with lists. None more so than Forbes.

Each year, Forbes publishes an growing number of lists...It is perhaps best known for the The Forbes 400, in which one billion dollars is no longer enough to get into America's most exclusive club. (I imagine those billionaires who have only -- only 1.1 billion are envious of those who came in at 398 and 399, and feel certain that next year they will be able to displace No. 400.)

Forbes also publishes

• The Celebrity 100:The world's most powerful and best-paid movie stars, musicians and athletes.
• The World's 100 Most Powerful Women: As more women now run corporations, nonprofits and entire countries, getting on our annual list has never been more challenging.
• The 200 Best Small Companies.
• The 400 Best Big Companies.
• Fastest-Growing Techs
• Asia's Best Under A Billion
• Asia's Fabulous 50 Companies
• The Largest Private Companies.
• The World's 2,000 Largest Companies.
• The Global High Performers.
• Australia & New Zealand's 40 Richest
• China's 40 Richest.
• Greater China's 40 Richest.
• India's 40 Richest.
• Israel's 40 Richest.
• Japan's 40 Richest.
• Korea's 40 Richest.
• Malaysia's 40 Richest.
• Midas 100: Tech's Top Dealmakers.
• Most Powerful Celebrities.
• Top-Earning Dead Celebrities.
• Singapore's 40 Richest.
• The 40 Richest Turks.
• Top-Earning CEOs.
• Wall Street's Top Analysts.
• World's Billionaires.
• World's Top-Earning Models.

But wait, that's not all.

Forbes also publishes:

• The Best Business Schools.
• The Best And Worst School Districts For The Buck.
• The Most Connected Campuses.

And:

• The World's Most Decadent Cocktails.
• The World's Most Expensive Tasting Menus.
• The World's Most Expensive Whiskies.
• The World's Top Power Dining Spots.
• Best Cities For Singles.
• Best Places For Business.
• Best States For Business.
• Capital Hospitality.

And more:

• Most Expensive Homes:
• In The World
• In The U.S.
• Midwest
• Northeast
• South
• West
• America's Fastest Growing Suburbs
• America's Most Expensive Commutes
• Best And Worst Home Improvements
• Best And Worst U.S. Housing Markets
• Inside The Homes Of The Celebrities
• Most Expensive Beachfront Homes
• Most Expensive Private Islands
• Most Expensive States To Insure A home
• Most Expensive ZIP Codes
• Priciest Penthouses 2007
• The Most Expensive Blocks In The U.S.
• Top Urban Enclaves
• What $1 Million Buys In Homes Across The U.S.
• World's Most Overpriced Real Estate Markets

And yet more:

• Best Cars For College Students
• Fastest Zero-To-60 Cars
• Least Expensive Cars To Drive
• Least Fuel-Efficient Hybrids
• Most Affordable Luxury Cars
• Most Coveted Cars
• Most Expensive Cars In The U.S.
• Most Expensive Cars To Drive
• Most Expensive Cars To Insure
• Most-Recalled Cars
• Most Stolen Luxury Cars
• Safest Cars 2007
• Sexiest Luxury Cars
• Top 20 Most Dangerous Vehicles
• Top 2007 Gas Guzzlers
• Value-Losing Cars

Here are some travel lists...

• Best New Business Hotels
• Most Dangerous Destinations 2007
• Most Expensive Airport Parking
• Most Expensive Cruises
• Most Expensive Restaurants In The U.S.
• Top Chefs Pick Meals Worth Traveling For
• Top Spots For First-Rate Room Service
• Top Tips For First-Class Upgrades
• World's Best Airlines
• World's Best Business Class
• World's Best First Class
• The World's Fastest Passenger Jets
• World's Most Expensive Hotel Suites
• World's Most Endangered Destinations
• World's Most Remote Destinations
• World's Most Romantic Hotels
• World's Ultimate Beach Bars

And we're not done yet.

• Best Of The Web:
• Collecting
• Education
• Health
• Investing
• Look It Up
• Luxe Shopping
• Management
• Personal Finance and Careers
• The Good Life
• Travel
• Gadgets We Love
• The E-Gang

Nope, still not done:

• MLB Team Valuations
• NASCAR Team Valuations
• NBA Team Valuations
• NFL Team Valuations
• NHL Team Valuations
• Richest Soccer Teams

Whew. Talk about milking a concept. The producers of "Ocean's 13" have nothing on Forbes.

Perhaps my favorite example of reporters and editors with too much time on their hands is the Forbes Fictional 15 -- Forbes' "annual listing of fiction's richest. This year's list boasts an aggregate net worth of $137 billion. (I also like Forbes' Top-Earning Dead Celebrities, and have written about them previously in a post entitled Dead Man Branding on Nov. 1 available at http://www.forbes.com/home/business/2007/10/29/dead-celebrity-earning-biz-media-deadcelebs07_cz_lg_1029celeb_land.html.)

How do you qualify for the Fictional 15? Forbes applies a rigorous standard:

• "We require that candidates be an authored fictional creation, a rule that excludes mythological and folkloric characters." (That knocked out Santa Claus, who had made the 2005 list. This is interesting because some on Forbes' editorial staff are convinced there is a "War Against Christmas" so why did they take Saint Nick of the list? The explanation: "We still estimate Claus' net worth as infinite, but we excluded him ... after being bombarded by letters from outraged children insisting that Claus is 'real.' We don't claim to have settled the ongoing controversy concerning Claus' existence, but after taking into account the physical evidence--toys delivered, milk and cookies devoured--we felt it was safer to remove him from consideration.")
• "They must star in a specific narrative work or series of works. And they must be known, both within their fictional universe and by their audience, for being rich.
  
• "Net worth estimates are based on an analysis of the fictional character's source material, and are valued against known real-world commodity and share price movements.
  
• In the case of privately held fictional concerns, we sought to identify comparable fictional public companies. All prices are as of market close, Dec. 10, 2007.

Weirdly, some fictional characters fell off the list including "Atlantic City real estate magnate Mr. Monopoly, who lost everything in the subprime mortgage crash. Archaeologist Lara Croft is missing and presumed dead after her plane disappeared above the Congolese jungle. And narco-capitalist Tony Montana, aka Scarface, was finally confirmed dead by a joint CIA/FBI task force."

They also published for the first time this year, "the largest fictional companies in the universe. The task was a mammoth undertaking: Dozens of reporters spent countless hours poring over financial documents, a far-flung network of correspondents traveled much of the space-time continuum, and sophisticated algorithms were perfected to perform the tricky business of converting gold pieces, Zorkmids, other exotic currencies into 2007 U.S. dollars."

Yes, that's right. Forbes editorial staff may not have time to write about real companies because they are too busy tracking down the net worth of fictional characters and fictional companies. (Fill in your own Enron joke here.)

Business Week predicts that Rupert Murdoch won't destroy the Wall St. Journal

I think it is safe to admit that selling advertising space on its front-page has not destroyed the Wall St. Journal. The quality of journalism has not declined. The esteem with which the paper is held has not diminished.

Now people are wondering the same thing about the Journal now that Rupert Murdoch owns it.

I don't think Rupe will ruin the Journal. It is his crown jewel. It will feed his Fox Business News. There's no reason to downscale or dumb-down the Journal...it would destroy the value of the franchise.

That's not to say he won't tart it up a bit. But I think we can rule out Page Three pin-up girls (as in the London Sun) or Page 6 business gossip (as in the New York Post's gossip page).

Business Week's media critic, Jon Fine, made the same prediction in the Dec. 10 issue.

I made that same prediction in a post entitled The Wall St. Post on Aug. 10, 2007. Check it out here. That's four months ahead of Jon Fine.

Meanwhile, look for our media predictions in the next few days.

New York Times looks at the Wall St. Journal: "Remaking The Journal"

From its headline, "Remaking the Journal," the front page of the New York Times' business section about Rupert Murdoch and the Wall St. Journal seemed like it could be interesting.

Mostly the 1600-word article reported on rumors about changes Rupe planned to make or decided against making.

According to the article, there are already plans to eliminate the Journal's Marketplace, "containing articles on business trends and technology, in the first half of next year, with a new section taking its place, according to people at Dow Jones and the News Corporation who have been briefed on the changes. The editor of Marketplace, Melinda Beck, recently left that post to write a column on health, and no replacement has been named."

The article also noted that "The Journal has been hiring new reporters and has made lucrative offers to a number of prominent journalists at The Times and elsewhere, mostly unsuccessfully."

But the article contained little that was news or insightful.

For example, because of the uncertainty, some reporters have left the Journal. In fact, the Times recently picked up Tara Parker-Pope, a long-time Journal health reporter who is now reporting and blogging for the Times.

Here's an example that the Times didn't have a real story: Take a look at the last line of the article: “A lot of us are at least a little worried about what this place will become,” said one veteran reporter at The Journal. “But right now our attitude is, wait and see.”

What does it mean that Fortune & BusinessWeek have undergone makeovers

Earlier this year, Fortune & BusinessWeek both unveiled new designs. BusinessWeek has specifically said that it updated its design with the intention of being more web-like.

One unusual aspect to its new design is that BusinessWeek articles now offer links to articles and sites from non-BusinessWeek articles and sources.

Although I can't pin down the last time both publications revamp their designs, I do believe the last time was earlier this decade -- which represents a much shorter time between redesigns.

That is another indication that Fortune and BusinessWeek realize that they must continue to work to relevant to web-savvy readers.

Interestingly, both publications have also redesigned their websites. They share similarities but are not 100% similar.

What's also interesting is that some of the print design elements seem as if they are designed for mobile users, and are less glitzy, less interesting.

Unfunny Comic: Mallard Fillmore

When the Boston Globe has made changes to the comics it publishes, the editors get lots of irate emails. Seems people are passionate about their favorite cartoon strips.

I think the Globe publishes a lot of unfunny comic strips -- some are not intended to be funny (like "For Better or Worse." But "Mallard Fillmore" by Bruce Tinsley seems to want to be funny, and consistently fails.

That may not be surprising for a strip whose character -- a duck -- is based on a pun referring to an otherwise forgettable president. (Quick: name one thing Millard Fillmore accomplished...you can't. He wasn't event elected president, but as vice president, and became president when Zachary Taylor died in office. Fillmore was not re-elected. He continued to try to be re-elected as the candidate of the Know Nothing Party -- which should tell you everything you need to know about him.)

Today's strip, for instance, is an example of the one-sided perspective that typically passes for humor. Mallard, who is a reporter, is interviewing Stephen Colbert about the current writers' strike, and says, "Mr. Colbert, shows like your 'Colbert Report' had to use reruns when the writers' strike began...Does that mean you can't be funny with a stable of writers?"

The Colbert character replies with an empty "thought balloon" (which indicates a character's thought or comments).

Mallard's response: "Woo! Did you just ad-lib that?"

Again, Colbert responds with an empty thought balloon.

Tinsley takes a cheap shot since he never questions whether politicians (on either side of the aisle -- although he would probably only accuse Democratic politicians of doing this) actually write their own speeches. Or take into consideration that Colbert and others may want to show solidarity with their writers by not continuing to produce the show during the strike.

Actually, I think Tinsley could use a stable of writers to improve the strip.

On the other hand, as an example of a strip that can be funny, there's "Monty" by Jim Meddick.

In today's strip, Monty is getting ready for Thanksgiving, and asks a recurring character, a professor from the future, "So Professor, do they still have Thanksgiving in the year 2525?"

The Professor is baffled, so Monty explains: "Don't tell me there isn't any Thanksgiving in the future."

"Well," says the Professor. "We celebrate a holiday on the 4th Thursday in November, but it's called ThanksGetting Day."

Now Monty is baffled.

"Yes," says the Professor. "As in 'Getting' great deals on name-brand merchandise. It's for procrastinators who didn't begin their holiday shopping on 'HallowPricesWeen..."