Wendy Priesnitz

About Wendy

Blog Archives

Facebook

Twitter

Contact

Home

Bookmark and Share

Life Media

Challenging Assumptions in Education by Wendy Priesnitz    Life Learning: Lessons from the Educational Frontier by Wendy Priesnitz    School Free by Wendy Priesnitz    Bringing it Home by Wendy Priesnitz    Summer Love, Winter Fires by Wendy Priesnitz    The House Where I Grew Up by Wendy Priesnitz    Markham: Community of the Future by Wendy Priesnitz    Natural Life Magazine    Life Learning Mag    Natural Child Magazine

The Words Are What’s Important, Not the Delivery Mechanism – August 24, 2010
Seth Godin – that bald guy author of twelve books, including Linchpin (a New York Times bestseller) – has announced that he will “no longer publish books traditionally,” meaning with a regular publisher in hardcover format. He says the process isn’t worth the effort and is too slow and laborious, and he can reach more people electronically. Although Godin is a guru these days, this announcement seems a bit overblown, given that e-books have been around for most of the last decade. And self-publishing has been around a lot longer than that (although it’s just recently become respectable).

It’s also not news that the traditional publishing model of which he speaks is, after all, pretty much on life support. Publishers – traditional and indie alike – as well as storefront booksellers and lots of magazines are having financial difficulties and even, in some cases, closing because they can’t adapt to the dual realities of economics and electronics.

And then there’s the other “e” reality – ecological. I’ve been researching the environmental impact of paper books and magazines versus e-readers for a future “Ask Natural Life” column in Natural Life Magazine, and for my own business purposes. And it appears that the e-readers come out ahead, especially in terms of water usage and toxic chemicals, and if you read a lot of books. As one pundit recently put it, “Think of an e-reader as the cloth diaper of books.”

As an author, I’ve considered doing the same thing as Godin. In fact, my next two books are on hold. The writing isn’t on hold, just the print publishing. I am, like Godin, convinced that I can create change faster and more economically by writing on my blogs and in our magazines – two of which are totally digital and one that is moving in that direction – and with e-books.

It took me awhile to come to that conclusion. I thought I would have trouble forsaking my beloved print and paper, not to mention re-inventing the business model I have been familiar with for over thirty years. I thought I was a paper book and magazine junkie. After all, my living room, dining room, kitchen, and office are ringed with bookshelves; there are boxes of books and magazines in the basement; I’m never without a notebook and pen wherever I go, although I often leave the electronics at home. Whenever we move to a new home, I purge the paper, only to find a new collection sprouting within a few months.

But then I realized that what really gives me the jolt is the power of words, not the bound pieces of paper that have been the delivery vehicle for them. I am (and always have been) in love with the effect words can have on readers, and on how they can create change – no matter where or how you read them. Marshall McLuhan was right back in 1964 when he wrote about how the nature of a specific medium has powerful effects on society. But his notion that the form of a medium embeds itself in the message, influencing how the message is perceived, is fast growing stale. Some people still think that a book isn’t “real” unless it is printed on paper, published by a big city corporation, and sold in a store on Main Street...or that the definition of “magazine” is a pile of glossy paper stapled together and sent through the mail. But we are moving quickly beyond those narrow interpretations and I think the importance of the words is beginning to surpass the importance of the medium. And that pleases this word junkie.
Posted: 2010/08/24 12:33 PM

Who Cares If Schools Make Kids Sick? – August 16, 2010
Yesterday, on the Natural Life Magazine blog, I wrote about electromagnetic fields and the health effects of living in an “electronic smog.” The topic came up because I read a piece in our local media about some families who suspect their kids are suffering headaches, dizziness, and nausea because of the Wi-Fi in their elementary school. The parents were reported to have been ignored by the school board when they requested it be replaced by wired Internet connections. I suggested that the Precautionary Principle was the appropriate response in this situation.

Today, I see that the school board is refusing that course of action because there is no “scientific or medical evidence” of harm, and they haven’t received one doctors’ note about the children’s ailments. Words cannot express how angry this makes me because there is a rather rapidly growing body of research on the subject (see my 2008 article in Natural Life on this topic, which I recently updated), and lots of evidence that kids are more vulnerable than adults. France, Germany, and England have dismantled wireless networks in schools and public libraries, and other countries are considering the same. They have acted on the Precautionary Principle, as should this school board.

Fortunately, at least some of these parents understand that they are not compelled to send their children to these schools. But that is beside the point. Children have the right to a healthy environment – at school and elsewhere. And every precaution should be taken by school board officials to make that so, in spite of people’s ignorance of or uninformed disagreement with the research that is available.

As I wrote in the Natural Life article, the electronics industry (which funds most of the research) is in the same situation as the tobacco industry was a few years ago: Agreeing to research findings that indicate harm from their products will reduce profits. When school boards collaborate with the industry by waiting for “something definitive” instead of mitigating the potential danger, it becomes clear that these people who call themselves educators are lacking in responsibility, imagination, basic research skills, and a sense of duty to the children in their care. f the rhetoric on the feedback forums relating to this story – and some of the commentary in the mainstream media – and are any indication, many people unfortunately share those traits. They are probably also fearful of the fact that they might need to change their own lifestyle if there was, indeed, harm proven.

P.S. Mr. Superintendent: If it’s not the Wi-Fi that’s causing these headaches and other problems, then what is it in your schools that’s making kids sick? Do you care? And what are you doing about it?
Posted: 2010/08/16 4:24 PM

Consumption, Boycotts, and the Ethics of Business – August 16, 2010
Rolf and I already live a pretty minimalist life relative to our peers. But I’m always looking for ways to simplify even more. One of the ways to do that, of course, is to reduce consumption. But there are things we need to buy in order to live our lives and run our business. When I buy those things, I try to buy ethically. For me, that means supporting local business, and buying products or services that involve minimal harm to or exploitation of humans, animals, and the environment.

We’ve just been reviewing Life Media’s ethics policy and our sustainability policy. And that has made me pay more attention than I might ordinarily have to some controversy in the blogosphere (at least in its progressive environs) about the recent BlogHer conference. BlogHer is a relatively large social media company that cultivates a community of women bloggers, aggregates a selection of blogs, maintains an advertising network for members’ blogs, and organizes an annual conference that seeks both to network bloggers and help them learn about the business of blogging, (ie. to increase their marketability). It has offices in New York and Silicon Valley, and has attracted some high-end venture capital funding. The company clearly knows marketing and provides a useful platform for its sponsors and advertisers to access a certain type of woman consumer. One company eager to jump on its sponsorship bandwagon at this year’s conference was the Nestlé brand Stouffers. And, hence the controversy: Some bloggers and potential conference attendees have a problem with Nestlė’s business practices.

One of the most prominent controversies involving Nestlé relates to its promotion of infant formula. If you’re not familiar with the issue – and the boycott of Nestlé that has been in place since 1977 – here is more information. But the company has been attacked for numerous other ethical missteps over the years, ranging from accusations of melamine in milk powder produced in China to use of child slaves to pick cocoa beans. As a result, a few bloggers decided to boycott the BlogHer conference as part of boycotting Nestlé. On the other hand, some bloggers justified their attendance in the hope that they could educate others about the problem with Nestlé.

I disagree with Nestlé’s tactics and my company Life Media supports the World Health Organization’s International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes. In fact, I’ve felt an affinity with the Nestle boycott since it began back in 1977 when my daughters (born in 1972 and 73) had already weaned themselves. But I can’t say I’ve taken part in it to any major degree because we seldom buy the sort of products the company and its subsidiaries sell. Nor have our magazines ever had any advertising interest from them. (Among its 6,000 brands are Poland Spring, L’Orėal, Arrowhead, Jenny Craig, Novartis, Haagen-Dazs, Lancome, Gerber, Ovaltine, Carnation, Rowntree, Crosse & Blackwell, Libby’s, San Pellegrino, Nescafė, and Ralston Purina.)

At any rate, I’m not sure boycotts work all that well – after all, Nestle hasn’t cleaned up its act in the past 30 years! So my instincts lead me to put my money where my values are, rather than where they aren’t. I wrote about this in the March/April issue of Natural Life Magazine. Buycotting, as it’s often called, means taking positive responsibility for our consumer choices based upon ethical, environmental, social, and political criteria.

Like boycotting, boycotting does require one to pay attention. And, although I’m far from pure in terms of these economic decisions, I do realize that sometimes I have to give up something important because it conflicts with my ideals. This is a stand Rolf and I have taken with our business since 1976 and have given up quite a lot of revenue in return. Our aforementioned ethics statement turns off many potential advertisers who will only advertise in media that agrees to say nice things about them editorially. And we sell fewer books than we might because we choose to support independent booksellers and refuse to deal with Amazon and their ilk whose race-to-the-pricing-bottom and monopoly arrogance is putting both small, local booksellers and independent publishers out of business.

But we sleep well because of these policies, in spite of the sacrifices. Rolf and I believe that the long-term value of our company’s (and our) integrity outweighs any short-term gain from compromising that integrity. We believe in doing business like Thomas Jefferson suggested: “Whenever you do a thing, act as if all the world were watching.” And I know that many of our customers are watching and appreciate our policies. We also believe that the only way to change the way the world works is to begin with ourselves and then to proceed one person at a time. Nestlė and its massive corporate colleagues will continue on in spite of anything I don’t buy from them. But I can help undermine their success by maintaining my own ethics and by supporting companies who operate in a similar manner. If you need to buy the sort of products sold by the corporate demons, please try to avoid those produced by Nestlė and its ilk. At the same time, be aware that there are alternatives that you can support – including buying nothing at all.
Posted: 2010/08/16 12:24 PM

Making Some Changes – August 8, 2010
We have been making some changes here, mostly in the interest of simplification. And that is something I am passionate about these days. Although I am not a big fan of automation, I am trying to use technology in a way that will allow me more time for writing (I have two books on the go right now: a memoir and a hard-hitting new education book) while still allow me to stay connected to my wonderful readers. All the old blog and article files are still here, and I will be finding ways over the next few weeks to re-attach them to this page. And there will be some new material as well. We will be making a few tweaks as we go, so if you spot anything odd or out of place, please let me know!

The covers above this writing space are just a few of the books and magazines I have written or edited over the years. Many of them are live links that will take you to pages with more information about them (and where you can purchase them if you are so moved!). My company Life Media purposely does not sell directly to Amazon or the other big box retailers; that is a story I will be telling here in the weeks to come. For now, suffice to say that I encourage you to buy directly from us or special order from your favorite neighborhood bookseller (if there are any left).
Posted: 2010/08/08 5:32 PM

Through the Green Living Looking Glass – July 18, 2010
Earlier this week, I received a press release with the following headline: “GreenSaver Becomes First and Only Energy Audit Provider to Offer Air Miles Reward Miles.” This new partnership between “Canada’s oldest not-for-profit organization dedicated to energy efficiency” and the consumer loyalty points collector program is supposed to encourage energy efficiency. Points collectors in Ontario, where GreenSaver operates, will earn 100 reward miles with the purchase of a home energy audit. Conversely, reward miles collected from purchases of other products and services can be redeemed for home energy audits. It’s being done under a year-old program by Air Miles called “My Planet,” which “encourages consumers to make greener lifestyle changes” and rewards them for “choosing environmentally sustainable products and services.”

With my normal cynicism about press releases and with all due respect to GreenSaver and Air Miles (full disclosure: my company collects Air Miles on some purchases), I’m trying to wrap my head around how any of this encourages energy efficiency. Air Miles are designed to encourage consumption and are earned on a wide variety of purchases, with a lot of travel, airline, and car-related companies involved, including Shell. And most of the My Planet participants aren’t much better in terms of encouraging energy efficiency; aside from GreenSaver and a green energy provider (and a non-Ontario public transit authority), they are bottled water home delivery companies, a bunch of drug stores and liquor stores, a couple of car repair companies, and the like. Not much there to encourage green lifestyle changes!

In Ontario, home energy audits may become mandatory when the house is sold, creating a lot of business for organizations like GreenSaver and potentially adding to the cost of buying a home. But there are tax incentives to offset the cost and to help pay for energy-efficiency improvements. Aside from saving money, I would hope that people would be motivated by doing the right thing. Encouraging people to buy more stuff – then giving them reward points that they can for a flight to Disneyland, an SUV rental, or to have bottled water trucked to their home – is not my idea of reducing one’s carbon footprint, no matter how many times it’s written in a press release.
Posted: 2010/07/18 1:06 PM