Avatar photoSteven Savage

Alternate Steves: The Lost Empire

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, Steve’s Tumblr, and Pillowfort.  Find out more at my newsletter, and all my social media at my linktr.ee)

I continue my series imagining different cultural, technical, and economic trends using myself as a lens. We’ve met a Steve who was in on the work-from-home craze of the early 90s, a Steve that watched Ohio’s high-speed rail boom of a similar era. Now let’s meet a very divergent Steve, in a world where big media empires crumbled – for the most part.

TRANSCRIPT FROM SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY RADIO: Professor Steven Savage on “TeachMeet”

Hello everyone out there! It’s your favorite lecturer on media history and the law, and by favorite I of course mean the only one. And that’s even my entire job!

So let’s get to my big announcement, one that’ll appeal to all twelve of you that took my “Media Turning Points” two-hundred level course. Can all you dozen please tell your friends?

My friend Serdar Yegulalp – yes, the guy you see in Rolling Stone – is coming to campus to speak on his new book “The Empire Of Media.” It’s his latest novel, a noir-deco tale of an alternate history where five giant corporations control world media. There’s murder, mayhem, skulduggery, and rich people doing awful things to each other. Now as much as we enjoy a good alternate history that involves annoying people killing each other, there’s even more!

You may ask why you haven’t heard of this novel yet. Well, that’s because it got released on the East Coast by Penguin. It hasn’t made it’s way here yet because, well, we all know how that works. But it also lets me speak with him on my next book – because we wrote ours together. Plus I get to ride his coattails.

Yes, some of you heard because I can’t shut up, but my next non-fiction book (with less murder) is coming out via Omnipress. It’s “The Lost Empire of Culture” and it’s going to explore how we got here in the world of media, communications, and ownership. Not interesting you say? More rich people being horrible? Well stay tuned.

Serdar and I wrote our books together because one thing that people forget – besides you specific twelve students, thanks again – is that we nearly had a world where only a few oversized corporations owned most of the media. Yes, you may have heard it, but he asks what happens if that was real, and I explore how we dodged not so much a bullet but an atomic bomb.

Imagine Disney as a dominant economic and cultural force, instead of a cautionary tale and favorite political target of politicians before you were born. Not many people remember the Berne Convention walkout of 1993. Or perhaps you’d like to get back to skullduggery as I dissect how several media companies, while pretending to cooperate, ended up backstabbing each other.

As you’ve heard me say, we dodged a world where ownership of works was basically eternal and creativity at best optional.

Imagine a world without your regional publisher. Imagine a world where Kinko’s isn’t sued over a price-fixing scandal for books! Imagine Diamond being worse than they were! Yes, I’ll even go into the famous Paper Scandal of 2015 for anyone who cares about it – which honestly isn’t me, I just like to be complete.

Serdar will cover what could have happened in a world of megacorporations putting out cartoons. I’ll cover why Publishers and Copyhouses got so big and why lawyers got into fistfights in Sweden. Hopefully it also means our books sell on both coasts.

See you there! Look for details soon! And for everyone attending my “Zines in action class” tomorrow, please bring your homework!

This was a fun one. I didn’t want to spell out the world too much, but more explore it from someone’s point of view. What’s media like when big media powerhouses wore down and in some ways destroyed themselves? What’s it like when publishers and distributors gain much more power but are also regional?

Steven Savage

This Meeting Didn’t Need To Be An Email

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, Steve’s Tumblr, and Pillowfort.  Find out more at my newsletter, and all my social media at my linktr.ee)

There’s a joke we’ve all heard – and probably repeated – “this meeting could have been an email.” It’s popular because it’s true, we’ve all had the meeting that could have been an email, and let’s be honest we’ve probably held those meetings. We’re all part of the problem.

But I’d like to argue that this joke wrong in some cases. That meeting didn’t need to be an email. That meeting didn’t need to exist in any form – email, chat, and so on – and that’s the real issue.

Am I going to analyze a joke about having too many meetings? Yes I am. If you don’t like it, send me an email.

So let’s take a look at this joke. We wasted a bunch of time getting people into a room, virtual or otherwise, to discuss things or share data. Some of us probably didn’t need to be there, certainly some of us didn’t want to be there. The end results probably could have been done in an email, not necessarily even a chain, just one.

The joke isn’t quite as funny when you analyze it, is it?

But here’s the thing. The meeting in question – or the email in question – is held because something had to be settled or something had to be done, or something had to be cleared up. Be it a meeting or email, something had to be done because something else didn’t.

So the real question is what was needed to avoid the meeting or the email that could have replaced it.

Was there some document that didn’t exist so people had to discuss it? Was there a signoff that could have been automated but is instead 5 people in meeting knowing 3 of them didn’t need to be there? Did people just not talk in the past and now you’re sitting in an actual room for hours because you could have done something earlier?

That meeting didn’t need to be an email. It needed to be a process. It needed to be an accurate help document. It needed to be a form in your software. It needed to be something that didn’t waste people’s time. It needed to not happen.

Now I am going to defend meetings as I schedule them as part of my job. But a good meeting is held when needed and should prevent even more time-consuming things from happening. A good meeting prevents other meetings.

But we shouldn’t just replace meetings with email. We have to make as many unnecessary.

Steven Savage

The Unaccountability Man

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, Steve’s Tumblr, and Pillowfort.  Find out more at my newsletter, and all my social media at my linktr.ee)

So lately for many reasons I’ve been thinking about how supposedly Great Men fail and let us down. We’ve all been disappointed, and as a person working in technology, I’ve had so many supposed luminaries disappoint me. I’ve been contemplating this for awhile, and I found something that helps understand it and makes clear how really bad it is to Hero Worship someone into deciding your life.

(And notice how we always talk Great Men? More on that later . . .)

Now as any regular reader knows, The Unaccountability Machine was a book that changed how I see the world, and I haven’t yet shut up about it. As I continue to not shut up about it, let me sum it up quickly: the book’s thesis ends up being organizations go insane because they follow limited measures as goals (like stock market value). These organizations may persist – they may be quite good at it when they go mad – but their decisions will cause problems.

Those problems, by the way, are sort of the last twenty-thirty years.

Now the idea of some Great Awesome Business Leader is a form of madness no different than deciding stock value is the only thing to pursue. You have decided to focus only on one thing, and that thing is “whatever this dude says.” That is insane it’s just one we allow because some people believe in the Great Super Savior who will save us.

(Also, ever notice how this one Dude also is good for stock prices? Hmmm . . . )

Anyway this problem has a few facets.

First, as cynical as I am about some Great Dude Saving us, let’s say you find an actual Great Dude. Fine, maybe they’re worth following but for how long? They may navigate issues today but not tomorrow after the world changes. They may age out of understanding things or just age. They might drop a bunch of very expensive hallcinogens on some New Age trip and fry their brains. Someone truly awesome isn’t forever and is still only human.

And that’s assuming that the hero-worship, the money, doesn’t go to their head. How many people who actually had at least some good ideas got so insulated from reality they lost any actual skill they had? How would we know when we’re so busy still telling how awesome they are.

Second, there’s what ed Zitron called the Business Idiot. People who know how to play the various stock market and business games but don’t really know anything else. They’re good, perhaps every good at fundraising and upping the stock price and getting venture capital – but that’s all they’re good at. They’v learned how to work the system, and in doing so give an illusion of a deliverable.

Follow those people – who are great at selling themselves – as you have the madness of following a so-called Great Man, but also of following a shyster.

Third, there’s people who fit the Great Man who are similar, fitting what I call The Narrative. Some guy shows up who says the right thing and does the right thing that fits people – and the press’ – narratives and wham they’re rich and famous. You can make a lot of money and get power jut by checking off the right boxes at the right time. This I think explains a lot of people.

This is where the term Great Man reveals the sexism in the discussions. Which tells you how much The Narrative controls our thoughts.

Fourth, of course, the Great Man idea just leads to grifters coming in, lying, and ripping people off. And we keep falling for it.

Looking for some hero to save the day, for someone to be the next Fill In The Blank, is a fools game. That person probably isn’t out there, possibly is coning you, and even if they are out there, they won’t last, they will get out of touch or want to retire or just pass away. It’s madness to rely on one person, no different than running a company just to get the stock price to go up.

Even if you benefit, what you leave in your wake will be harmful.

Steven Savage