Responsible For Your Personal Brand

PERSONALI was walking down a corridor when a woman stepped in front of me and shared her amazement for the depth of my soul. I took her comment as a compliment until she added, “So why don’t you live more like the stories in your book?”

The book she referenced was a series of true life events that I had experienced, which meant I did live like the stories in realtime when I actually lived out those moments. But for some reason our casual meetings had never allowed her to see any of those attributes of mine.

She was convinced that I was a shallow man. At first, I thought it was her fault for never taking time to get to know me. But after pondering the idea, I realized that I was in control of what I presented and withheld.

In that moment, I realized I was the only one in control of my personal brand. It was my responsibility, and the neglecting of it was a choice that could promote the opposite of who I am.

Frank_Cutitta“A personal brand is really a story that highlights your attributes,” says Frank Cutitta, founder of the Center for Global Branding. “This story will help others understand who you are and where you fit into your industry’s or company’s marketplace.”

While many people have created personal brands for themselves via their choices of what is published on Facebook, they really aren’t aware of how the style or imagery represents them. Few people know how to assess their posts, which becomes the foundation of their personal brand or story.

What You Play Up Stays Up

Raynard_JacksonRaynard Jackson, President & CEO of Raynard Jackson & Associates, LLC., a D.C. public relations/government affairs firm, who is regularly on CNN, MSNBC, BET, FOX News, and C-SPAN, giving his analysis on subjects from politics, culture, foreign policy, and economics, recently addressed the black community about their personal brand.

“What have Black folks done that causes police to totally undervalue our lives and causes others to feel threatened by our mere presence and immediately feel the need to call the police?”

In a controversial statement, Jackson put the onus of brand on the individuals. He also suggested things that fuel misperceptions can create an artificial reality, including the television shows like Empire, Insecure, and The Quad that showcase and popularize Blacks in very negative roles.

“We glorify the thug life in our music; scantily-clad Black women have become the standard in music videos,” he says. “Put yourself in the shoes of a White person riding public transportation that sees a train full of Black teenagers with their pants hanging halfway down their butts, calling each other n–gers, and constantly grabbing their crotches.”

“Or the police pulling up to a crowded park and hearing loud rap music being played talking about ‘f-ck the police’ or ‘b–ch this’ or ‘b–ch that.’”

“We have almost thirty years of negative images about Blacks throughout every media platform available and now you want to act surprised that people have these negative perceptions about us? Come on, man. Let’s be real.”

“Don’t tell me you are a hoe and then act surprised when I treat you like one. Don’t introduce me to your best friend by saying, ‘this is my b—ch, Jennifer’ and then get mad when I call her a ‘b–ch.’”

“Maybe Whites believe in the old adage that says, ‘when a person shows you who they are, you better believe them.’”

“So, what I am saying to Black folk is pull up your damn pants, stop calling each other n–gers in public and private, stop calling each other b–hes and hoes and thinking these are terms of endearment because they are not.”

The film, television, and music industry is known for focusing in on stereotypical angles of life for any given community to save development time. Breaking away from these misperceptions can be done with a personal brand.

Develop Your Personal Brand Before Society Does

A personal brand matters and happens every time we communicate in business and socially.

Your personal brand will develop your online (and offline) reputation, increase trust in your authority and ability, make you more memorable, and open networking opportunities for your future. Therefore it is worth our time to take responsibility for our personal brand and not leave it to stereotypes or the media.

The following steps will help you take control of your personal brand.

  1. Define who you are professionally.
  2. Define who you are socially.
  3. Craft responses on key topics that reveal who you are.
  4. Adjust your online presence to match up with 1-3.

The goal is integrity, to make sure you seem like the same person across all of your social media sites. If you want certain things to remain personal, then adjust your online settings to keep it private. The key is taking responsibility for your image or personal brand, and not leave it as prey to be gobbled up by stereotypes or the sum of misperceptions.

(Raynard Jackson quotes are attributed to the Freedom’s Journal Institute’s article titled “Black Hollywood is Complicit in Negative Perception of Black Community” by Raynard Jackson.)
Copyright © 2018 by CJ Powers
Advertisements

New Negligent Parenting Laws

Old Enough for Bad Movies

Few states tell us how to raise our kids. Illinois is now one of those states that says, “any minor under the age of 14 years whose parent or other person responsible for the minor’s welfare leaves the minor without supervision for an unreasonable period of time without regard for the mental or physical health, safety, or welfare of that minor” is being negligent.

The new law suggests that I would’ve needed a babysitter when I was 13 years old—a teenager. The funny thing, I was a babysitter for the little kids around the block at age 12. I was responsible, being raised by a police officer and teacher, and I knew how to keep the kids entertained. I even handled a faulty gas line fire both calmly and efficiently, making the parents thankful they hired me.

A few high school and college kids I knew were far less responsible and couldn’t manage an emergency if it happened. They allowed the kids under their supervision to wreak havoc, creating a huge mess for the parents to clean up after their return.

And what about the fact that our 13-year-olds are allowed to watch a single occurrence of natural frontal nudity and hear two F-words in a PG-13 movie, but they can’t stay home alone for a subjective unpublished time frame?

The law does allow you to leave your child for a “reasonable” amount of time, but if a neighbor makes a call suggesting negligence, the state can take the child into custody without a warrant. Once a court date is provided, the judge has 15 non-exhaustive factors to consider in determining the guilt of the parent. Unfortunately the courts do not provide a list of criteria to help the parent determine if his or her 13-year-old can be left alone for a short time.

I’m a firm believer that most parents know if their 13-year-old can be left alone and for how long. I’m also confident that the government has no idea if a young teen is capable of being left alone, regardless of the period of time in question. This perspective suggests that the new law was put in place as a tool to punish a very small percentage of people who are negligent when it comes to raising their kids.

The problem with a law aimed at so few, rather than being a law for the majority, is that it opens the door for someone wanting to abuse or hurt a healthy family. It only takes one phone call to engage the system and pull a kid from their home until the issue can be resolved in court.

Worse yet is the list of 15 non-exhaustive factors a judge can use in making his or her determination. This list is not available to the general public (at least not at the time I wrote this blog), which means parents don’t know the criteria that their parenting skills are being judged on.

And, what happens if the political landscape changes and a new list warns the judge about children living in what might be considered an overzealous “religious” home? Can the government eventually define healthy parenting as those who “protect” children “from” religion until they become adults? That’s the way it is in some countries.

Whenever laws are put in place to punish the few instead of protecting the many, we find more restrictions placed on our lives, which takes away another piece of our freedom. Historically, specific and objective laws were designed for the majority of the people and the few oddball cases were determined by the judge based on the intent revealed by the majority of the laws.

Abuse becomes too prevalent when laws become highly subjective and parents are being measured by a list that is not available for their review. Our society has become so focused on protecting the few that we’ve lost sight of how we protect the majority.

I hope we protect all children who face abuse, but we do it without jeopardizing the freedom of the majority of our children. There has to be a better way. Shouldn’t lawmakers look for it?

Copyright 2018 by CJ Powers

Society’s New Judgment System

pexels-photo-534204Our love affair with social media has forced society into a new form of isolation where “truth” is determined by the number of people we convince to believe our tale, rather than being about proven or substantiated facts. The social platforms have empowered the media to drive crowds in how to think and respond. The users are becoming judge and jury to the detriment of society.

In the past, we waited to learn if something alleged was proven to be true or false. During lengthy trials, people waited with anticipation of the outcome to know how to proceed concerning the circumstances or the person. But today, if you allegedly did something 30 years ago that is now a hot point of discussion, you’re immediately fired and blocked from making any future income.

Our society seems to be fine with this new politically correct judgment system. But not everyone wants to see his or her future disappear based on an allegation that has no merit.

I recently read an article about a woman who accused former President H.W. Bush of assaulting her. The woman posed for pictures with several political figures and was blocking President Bush. He called out to get her attention, but she didn’t respond. He then reached forward from his wheelchair and gave her a little tap. She quickly stepped to the side and all was well.

Several years later, after the reporting of harassment was politically correct and popular in the media, she reported that he assaulted her. She said he touched her backside and told her dirty jokes, which was never substantiated by any of the dozen people at the photo shoot. But the media published the assault story.

Tom Cruise’s “Minority Report” is about a society where empaths have people arrested for thinking about committing a crime, sparing society from the pain caused by an actual crime. People are judged, based not on what they did, but what they allegedly were about to do.

The number of people losing their jobs based not on facts, but allegations is staggering. What’s worse are the number of people losing their jobs because of someone else’s allegations. The Netflix series “House of Cards” was cancelled due to Kevin Spacey’s allegations from decades earlier, putting the 300 cast and crew members out of work.

The number of people leaving social media is also astonishing and telling. When asked, most say they are dropping social media because it’s become the breeding ground of false news. Some mention they want to protect their future by avoiding a misunderstanding in social media that could negatively impact their jobs.

In the past few years, I’ve asked numerous employers if they ever used social media to vet a person before hiring them. Everyone said, “Yes.” One person made sure she didn’t accidentally hire a heavy drinker. Another person avoided extremists like “Christians.” Still another person said, “If I like their social life and they agree with my political views, I’ll hire them.”

Society is no longer growing from people listening to both sides of every issue and thinking through its consequences. Instead, we’ve become a people who gather in groups of like-minded folks that judge others on the number of allegations that they’ve received, rather than on documented facts.

Before we get judged based on a regrettable choice made during our less intelligent years, we might want to drop our opportunity to judge others and instead learn how to give grace. That doesn’t mean we ever condone their unhealthy mistakes, but it does mean we focus on ourself, making sure we live out the best version of our lives.

Copyright © 2017 by CJ Powers

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Where Do I Sit?

Theater_Seats

The weekend has arrived and those dating are most likely headed out to dinner and a movie, but they don’t know where to sit in the theater. Most know to avoid the first few rows and some will make sure they don’t end up in the back of the theater unless they like being remote. But few know, for which seats the director designed the movie.

Theaters range in size and shape and follow the rudimentary formats prescribed by the National Association of Theater Owners and the Motion Picture Association of America. These formats are based on screen ratios and the projector’s “throw” of light based on lumens, curvature of the lens and the screens’ reflective material.

Let’s make it simple…

Without trying to figure out the complex formulas to determine seating placement, a well-designed theater will provide good seating about two thirds of the way back from the screen. Unfortunately that’s based on typical screens being about 20’ X 47’ and the theater having a total depth of… Nope, let’s keep it simple.

Have you ever attended the rehearsal of a stage show? Did you notice that the director always sits in a specific place? Or, how about at a concert venue, did you notice where the mixing board is located?

Microphone jacks are typically placed in the ideal location for the director to plug in his headset or microphone in professional, university and high school theaters. This gives him the closest view of the stage, while still being able to see the entire stage. If he moves closer, he can’t get the big picture. If he moves further back, he can’t focus on the detail.

In film, the same rule of thumb holds true. When a director is viewing his final mixed film, he is seated based on the screen location and surround sound speakers. Even in the mixing room the director is positioned in the ideal location and makes all the decisions based on that spot.

When the show releases to the silver screen the ideal location is about 2.5X the screen height back from the movie screen. If you select a seat in that location, you’ll notice surround speakers directly to the left and right of you. The entire movie was created based on those seats. Any other point of view changes the impact of the film.

For instance, if you don’t like horror films you can sit in the back to diminish the surprise factor and reduce the emotional pull on your heart. If you enjoy rollercoaster like action films you can move closer to the screen to keep your head moving and help your stomach churn your latest meal.

Regardless of the screening room size, you’re safe sitting 2.5X the screen height back from the screen in order to see the film as the director designed it.

© 2017 by CJ Powers

SaveSave

Creatives Are Driven To Live

OklahomaBill Hybels, a legendary spiritual leader, once talked about a “holy discontentment” and how it drives the spiritual to continually look for ways to help others. Choreographer Martha Graham spoke of an artist’s “divine dissatisfaction” that drives all creative work.

Prose writer Rachel Carson also spoke of this unrest that leads to creative activity, “No writer can stand still. He continues to create or he perishes. Each task completed carries its own obligation to go on to something new.”

Dancer and choreographer Agnes De Mille, known for her original choreography in Oklahoma!, a musical that generated numerous awards including a record setting 2,212 performances, found herself struggling with her “fairly good work” when critics touted it as a “flamboyant success.”

De Mille received clarity concerning this disconnect in her life when she bumped into Graham and shared her sense of dissatisfaction. De Mille started the conversation with a confession that she had a burning desire to be excellent, but had no faith to achieve it.

Graham: “There is vitality, a life force, an energy, a quickening that is translated through you into action, and because there is only one you in all of time, this expression is unique. And if you block it, it will never exist through any other medium and it will be lost. The world will not have it. It is not your business to determine how good it is, nor how valuable, nor how it compares with other expressions. It is your business to keep it yours clearly and directly, to keep the channel open. You do not even have to believe in yourself or your work. You have to keep yourself open and aware to the urges that motivate you. Keep the channel open. As for you, Agnes, you have so far used about one-third of your talent.”

De Mille: “But, when I see my work, I take for granted what other people value in it. I see only its ineptitude, inorganic flaws, and crudities. I am not pleased or satisfied.”

Graham: “No artist is pleased.”

De Mille: “But then there is no satisfaction?”

Graham: “No satisfaction whatever at any time, there is only queer divine dissatisfaction, a blessed unrest that keeps us marching and makes us more alive than the others.”

Graham and Hybels had hit on something fascinating. Both saw the activity rising from creative discontentment as divinely inspired for the good of others. While artists long for satisfaction with their work, the blessed only receive a drive to move on to another work.

Julia Cameron, known as a artist, poet, playwright, novelist, filmmaker, composer, journalist and teacher, learned through her studies of the human condition that, “Art is a spiritual transaction. Artists are visionaries. We routinely practice a form of faith, seeing clearly and moving toward a creative goal that shimmers in the distance—often visible to us, but invisible to those around us.”

When I meditate on what I’ve observed, whether information from life or scripture, and many times the combination of both, I receive a divine awareness that helps me to understand a perspective that most have never considered. The excitement contained within the moment drives me to share it with others. But they don’t get it.

The only way for people to understand what I’ve seen is to create art that can demonstrate it or move a person to consider something outside of their reality. It therefore compels me to create art, always hoping it reaches the people it was intended to reach.

This continual drive that most of my friends label as passion, breathes life into me daily. It forces me to try and try again so everyone gets the gift of understanding that I received, but my attempts always fall short. The cycle begins again and again. While I can’t complain because of the life that stirs within me, I am always dissatisfied in my feeble ability to communicate such an important understanding.

And there lies the truth of an artist’s dilemma. Filled with life overflowing, always driven, but never arriving with any form of satisfaction. I’ll call this curse a blessing for it is who I am.

© 2017 by CJ Powers

 

 

SaveSave

Google’s PC Police Algorithm

Toxic_WordsThe PC police are expanding watch over the Internet. No longer will you have true freedom of speech, as Google and other search engines are working to block your toxic words from being published.

I tested Google’s new algorithm to see if my word choices would be blocked. Here is a sentence I wrote that was 2% likely to be perceived as toxic.

“Those who accept media bias without consideration find themselves following unhealthy trends.”

I then decided to make the comment more opinionated to grab the attention of the reader and found my words were 97% likely to be perceived as toxic.

“Those who accept media bias without consideration find themselves following idiots.”

Here is the winning version of my statement that was 0% likely to be perceived as toxic.

“Those who accept media bias without consideration find themselves following trends.”

I next tried a few religious comments. The following statement was 34% likely to be perceived as toxic.

“Shows about Jews should be banded from the media.”

After correcting the word “banded” to “band” the statement was 18% likely to be perceived as toxic.

“Shows about Jews should be band from the media.”

I then switched out the word “Jews” to “Muslim” and then “Christian,” which dropped the likeliness of the statement to be perceived as toxic to 1% for each.

It was apparent that the algorithm used was based on machine learning, which draws from biased news sources. The more sources stating that certain words are toxic, the greater the bias being policed becomes.

In other words, if you fill the Internet with documents, stories and news briefs stating how hateful the word “gismo” is, you’ll actually shift the algorithm to determine that the use of the word is toxic.

While its unlikely a group of caring people will produce 20 million articles using the word “gismo” as a hate word to change algorithm results, some might consider sidelining their competition by turning their important phrases into hate words.

I think we’re at a turning point and need to leave ethical and moral decisions to man, not machines. Then again, can you really trust them?

© 2017 by CJ Powers