Thursday, May 24, 2007
If My Time Studying In The Field Of Software Design Has Taught Me Anything...
As I typed that last entry, and interestingly, this one as well, I have noticed that blogger has greyed out the 'Save Now' button which sits next to the 'Publish Post' button, with a useful message that emanates from it in a useful little speech-bubble: 'New Blogger saves your drafts automatically!'
Now, isn't that nice? Instead of removing the button entirely, they just grey it out and leave a message explaining what the hell's going on...
...so, could you guys remove the button now, please?
Now, isn't that nice? Instead of removing the button entirely, they just grey it out and leave a message explaining what the hell's going on...
...so, could you guys remove the button now, please?
You Want An Update? Let Me Solve Your Problem:
Actually, I do have something to ramble about. Sorry, guys.
I have noticed a tendency of Mr Phil to make generalisations when dealing with people's specific circumstances. I do think that, by and large, people can actually be manipulated very easily, because we all do essentially think in the same way. This is only a generalisation, though and when dealing with a specific person and engage them as an individual, I'm almost offended by how he deals with them by almost exclusively throwing cliches at them. That ain't how psychiatry works, buddy. Yes, this is TV, so you don't have much time to get the point across and, you know, learn about the person you're trying to help, but damnit, you're giving your viewers the wrong impression that you are in fact being helpful and when it comes to audiences, daytime TV viewers can be pretty easily persuaded. It may seem that you've made a huge difference once the ad break rears its persuasive head (no, seriously, those silly ads they have showing during the day? Those are actually damned effective, apparently), but that ain't the case - these people are probably going to walk away and realise that what the nice man said very slowly, in his educated drawl...(how's that for a paradox?) doesn't fit their own circumstances at all that effectively: i.e: They're stubborn, lazy, anti-social, or just plain got some air time without looking like a complete n00b (or did they?).
Nobody can learn about somebody and give them guidance about their relationships, long-term or otherwise, in the empty space between ad breaks. It may work for Judge Judy, but damnit, when you're using the techniques below, it damn well shouldn't take too long.
1) Height advantage (still applies if it's assisted by terrain)
2) Legal clout
3) Yelling a lot
To be honest, I'm not sure I'm qualified to rant on about a subject that, with the very occasional exception, know nothing about. Sure, I can claim to have studied crowd manipulation/control in my own time, but I have never sat through an episode of Dr Phil, or, for that matter, Oprah or Judge Judy. For what it's worth (and I'm hoping it's worth something), I know little about psychiatry or psychology when applied to the individual.
I have noticed a tendency of Mr Phil to make generalisations when dealing with people's specific circumstances. I do think that, by and large, people can actually be manipulated very easily, because we all do essentially think in the same way. This is only a generalisation, though and when dealing with a specific person and engage them as an individual, I'm almost offended by how he deals with them by almost exclusively throwing cliches at them. That ain't how psychiatry works, buddy. Yes, this is TV, so you don't have much time to get the point across and, you know, learn about the person you're trying to help, but damnit, you're giving your viewers the wrong impression that you are in fact being helpful and when it comes to audiences, daytime TV viewers can be pretty easily persuaded. It may seem that you've made a huge difference once the ad break rears its persuasive head (no, seriously, those silly ads they have showing during the day? Those are actually damned effective, apparently), but that ain't the case - these people are probably going to walk away and realise that what the nice man said very slowly, in his educated drawl...(how's that for a paradox?) doesn't fit their own circumstances at all that effectively: i.e: They're stubborn, lazy, anti-social, or just plain got some air time without looking like a complete n00b (or did they?).
Nobody can learn about somebody and give them guidance about their relationships, long-term or otherwise, in the empty space between ad breaks. It may work for Judge Judy, but damnit, when you're using the techniques below, it damn well shouldn't take too long.
1) Height advantage (still applies if it's assisted by terrain)
2) Legal clout
3) Yelling a lot
To be honest, I'm not sure I'm qualified to rant on about a subject that, with the very occasional exception, know nothing about. Sure, I can claim to have studied crowd manipulation/control in my own time, but I have never sat through an episode of Dr Phil, or, for that matter, Oprah or Judge Judy. For what it's worth (and I'm hoping it's worth something), I know little about psychiatry or psychology when applied to the individual.
Since I can't be bothered blogging about anything substantial, here's a relatively long comment I've left on Lucas' blog. It was in response to him, in simple terms, stating that Dr Phil is a bit of a generalising tool:
[...Never once had any reason to believe the crap that went on between my parents was my fault...at least, not directly.My mum claimed that she was only with my father for as long as she was because of my sister and I. In other words, it wasn't my fault that they broke up, but it was because steph and I existed that they stayed together. Made me feel rather bad about the state of things, not because there was anything I could have done, not because I had a crap childhood as a result, but because at that point, I realised that neither of those two should have had kids but did anyway, and I was one of them. I was about 10 years old when I came to this realisation.
How fun.
So, yeah, Dr Phil, explain to me why I don't plan on having kids.
Ever.
Heh, heh.
But seriously. I find it hard to take that guy seriously. He seems to place too much emphasis on how he says something to the point where I believe it's a technique he uses consciously to distract people from learning that what he does say isn't terribly profound. Oprah does the same thing. ]
[...Never once had any reason to believe the crap that went on between my parents was my fault...at least, not directly.My mum claimed that she was only with my father for as long as she was because of my sister and I. In other words, it wasn't my fault that they broke up, but it was because steph and I existed that they stayed together. Made me feel rather bad about the state of things, not because there was anything I could have done, not because I had a crap childhood as a result, but because at that point, I realised that neither of those two should have had kids but did anyway, and I was one of them. I was about 10 years old when I came to this realisation.
How fun.
So, yeah, Dr Phil, explain to me why I don't plan on having kids.
Ever.
Heh, heh.
But seriously. I find it hard to take that guy seriously. He seems to place too much emphasis on how he says something to the point where I believe it's a technique he uses consciously to distract people from learning that what he does say isn't terribly profound. Oprah does the same thing. ]
