On the use of 'Spoiler Alert'

TV is better than ever right now, so many quality shows there's never enough time to watch them all. Not only that, but there are now more ways to watch TV than ever before. Used to be you'd have to camp out in front of the TV on the right channel and the right time to see the program you wanted. Now you have options...Sure you can watch shows as they air, or you can record them on a DVR and watch them later (even forward through the commercials). Maybe you prefer to stream them from your carrier or the network. Or you can wait and watch whole seasons on a service like Netflix or Amazon Prime. Yes, plenty of options.

However, with all of these delayed options for watching shows, inevitably, info on your favorite shows can be seen or heard, commonly known as spoilers. Spoilers can take many forms, all of which can be a real bummer. Maybe it's the person who is dying to discuss this week's episode and spills the beans not knowing that you haven't caught up yet. Could be the casual glance at Yahoo! news only to see who won last night's game that you had stored in your Tivo. Or perhaps the morning radio crew couldn't wait to talk about who won the Oscar for Best Picture. Whatever form it takes, it can be a downer.

Then there's malicious spoiling. Those folks who just love to let the cat out of the bag and revel in your misery. These people are a scourge on the TV viewing public and should be strung up and forced to watch Laverne and Shirley re-runs as penance for their collective bubble bursting.

Which brings me to my point. The phrase 'Spoiler Alert' was conceived to protect those of us who like to watch shows a bit past the airing date from those who seek to expose potentially exciting plot lines. This can work well, when used properly:

• Know your audience. If you work in an office full of people with common favorites, maybe don't let it all fly first thing Monday morning.
• When describing potentially sensitive material, announce 'Spoiler Alert'
• Upon announcing "Spoiler Alert" allow enough time for those of us who want to excuse ourselves (or stick our fingers in our ears) before your recount of the show's events. Don't just dive right in after the Spoiler Alert declaration.
• I know it should seem obvious, but saying "Spoiler Alert" after you say who got killed on Game of Thrones, is not effective. 
• While I don't believe there is a universally accepted amount of time lapsed before talking about shows is acceptable, 2 or 3 days seems reasonable to me. But a courtesy Spoiler Alert is always appreciated.

I think if we can all abide by these simple tenets, we can put an end to spoiling. Happy watching.

"Do one thing, do it well"

That tagline was a slogan recently used by GMC Trucks extolling their skill in truck building. The underlying lesson was that by focusing on one type of product, they garnered an expertise and superiority that could only come from specialization. "Jack of all trades, master of none" as the old saying goes, but does that really hold true? Could anyone say that Ford makes a worse truck because they also have a full line of automotive products?

In some cases, it could be said that product diversification didn't work. Did anyone know that Smith and Wesson made a mountain bike? Or that Frito Lay made lemonade? Exactly.

The flip side includes companies that took a risk and stepped outside their comfort zones to create real success stories. Can you imagine if Apple never looked beyond computers?

Then there's the extreme cases of over- specialization. It seems like there's a dedicated position for ever little job out there. Hire a heating company to fix an issue with your furnace and they're just as likely to tell you you need a plumber, or an electrician. No Jacks here.

Seems like there must be happy middle ground between trucks and contractors. Apple found it, maybe we can all find just enough things to do right.

Back in my day, a Hershey bar cost a nickel!

We've all heard our parents say this or something like it (depending on the 'vintage' of your parents) before. Well, I guess I've officially turned that corner, because I was at the supermarket with my daughter and upon seeing candy bar prices of 99 cents, I remarked, "When I was a kid, candy bars cost a quarter!". Another favorite candy of mine, Jujyfruits (aka dental dynamite) in the big yellow box was selling for $1.49 when I remember that it cost a hefty $.49 in my youth. Not only that, but the box was only 5oz, where it used to be closer to 8oz. Yes, the times they are a-changing, but what's interesting is the things that haven't gone up in price, or have even gone down.

We could obviously discuss gas prices, as they dipped to ridiculous lows as recently as a few months ago. I was paying less at the pump than I did 10 years ago, but as the market has stabilized, that's reversed.

I recently read an article about the new Honda Civic Coupe, with a starting base price of $19,050. Having shopped this same car back in 1996, I know it had a starting price of $13,980. A modest increase of 36% when you consider all the updated performance, safety, and technology you get in new cars these days and well below the 'Candy Factor' of price increase.

Recently I bought a new pair of sneakers and noticed that a good pair of running shoes will cost around $60-80, same as what I recall paying back in high school. How can a candy bar quadruple but a pair of Nikes stays the same?

Computers are an area that is truly perplexing. My first laptop cost me over $1200 and it was refurbished to keep the price that low. I have replaced or upgraded my computer every 2-3 years since that first one and the prices have only gone down while the capabilities and features have only improved. My latest computer with a much larger screen, more hard drive/RAM, and faster processor cost around $800. I'm not complaining, mind you, and I realize that with technology as materials and techniques get more streamlined the price goes down, but I would also think that the constant improvement of the components/tech would offset the decreases.

All we can do is roll along with progress and groan as the price of a Baby Ruth rises to more than an cell phone charger, and rejoice when a gallon of gasoline costs less than a gallon of milk. Just try not to sound too much like Grandpa Simpson when you say, "Back in my day...".

The Burden of Choice

'Variety, it's the spice of life' as the saying goes. We all like to have choices in our life, to feel like we have some control over what lies before us and not have it all laid out on our behalf, but in this magic day and age we live in, the choices often become so numerous that they become overwhelming.

Take a simple example, ice cream. I recall when I was young, if the treat of ice cream was presented, the offerings were vanilla, chocolate or strawberry. Easy enough, between those three, most folks could probably choose a favorite. But sometime around my later youth, new flavors began to come into the picture. It started off simply enough with chocolate chip (melding two of the 'basic' flavors), French Vanilla (who would have thought you could improve on vanilla), and maybe things got as crazy as rocky road (put the nuts and marshmallow IN the ice cream!). I guess people could not get enough of these because a flavor explosion occurred over the ensuing years/decades. Now when I step up to the local ice cream stand, I have to select from a dizzying array of taste choices, and when I finally settle with my flavor(s) of choice, then out comes the toppings menu.

So what's the problem? With so many choices, surely you can find what you like, isn't that a good thing? On the surface the answer would certainly be yes, however inevitably, no matter how hard I try to make the best choices, I experience regret. Initially I figured this must just be me, that I make poor decisions, or I just have the type of personality that always makes me wonder 'what if?', but it seems I'm not alone.

I did a little poking around on the internet and many articles have been written about what has been titled as 'Overchoice', where people are paralyzed (maybe a bit of an exaggeration) but the abundance of choices presented to them. A gentleman by the name of Barry Schwartz wrote a book called The Paradox of Choice which goes into a great deal of detail on the topic. A notable quote, "the more options there are, the more likely one will make a non-optimal choice, and this prospect undermines whatever pleasure one may get from one's actual choice." I hear you Barry, I wish I had gotten the Maine Moose Tracks instead of the Cookies 'n Cream.

So what can be done to abate this epidemic of choice? Something I've tried to alleviate this condition is something I will call 'pre-choice'. If I can make some level of determination of my selection prior to being exposed to the options, then I've already removed a cross section from the equation. An example I've mentioned before on this blog is toothpaste. There are easily a hundred different types of toothpaste in any grocery store to choose from, but by deciding that I don't want whitening in my toothpaste, I narrow my options down to just a few (or even one!), no pressure there.

What about a more 'daunting' decision, like say a menu in a restaurant? Same deal, we went to a Chinese restaurant for dinner last week. I had pre-decided that I was going to get a combination plate, so I only had to look at the options on that part of the (very lengthy) menu. While still having to decide from the 20 or so options on that list, it was much easier than sorting through the hundreds in the remainder of the menu.

The flood of choices aren't going away, in fact they will likely only become more numerous. So choose wisely and don't suffer from frozen confectionery regret, or just get a 6 scoop sundae and cover all your bases.

What items do you think that too many choices currently exist?

The home of the free...

I was driving in the car with my 12 year old daughter over the weekend and she expressed her concern about the hazard of people who text while they drive. She went on to tell me about an idea she had for a device that would be installed in cars that would not allow drivers to use their smartphone in the car. While this would certainly prevent many texting while driving accidents, my reply to her was, "That would never fly, this is America, where we have the freedom to do what we aren't supposed to." She replied, "Dad, that makes no sense." and the conversation was over.

While I will admit, my off hand comment does sound nonsensical, it has some validity. Could you imagine the outcry if suddenly one of our "freedoms" to be bad was revoked? Imagine if cigarettes were made illegal? If cars were made so they couldn't exceed the speed limit? If all junk foods were taken off the shelves? We know these are all things we shouldn't partake in, but we demand the ability to choose our negligence.

And of course big business would have their say. Tobacco is a huge industry and lobbyists work hard to make sure you have right to kill yourself slowly with their products. And how many Corvettes do you think Chevrolet would sell if you couldn't open it up on the highway? Frito Lay wants you to able to pick between Original and Cool Ranch Doritos. They all rake it in while we push the limits.

So rejoice in the fact that we live in a free country where we can put the petal to the metal on the way to get Marlboros and Twinkies. But use your freedom wisely, and please for the sake of your fellow motorists, save the texting for when you get there.