Mediaboss Marketing

Focuson what you can control, on whats in front of youis critical in any meaningful endeavor.

When asked his advice as to how Olympic athletes could best prepare to compete in the pandemic-delayed 2020 Tokyo Olympics, Michael Phelpsthe most-decorated Olympian of all time, with 28 swimming medals to his namesaid this: Focus on what you can control. That is something that's so important going into this.

Focuson what you can control, on whats in front of you, on whats not only desirable, but achievableis indeed critical going into any meaningful endeavor, be it Olympic competition or the effort to combat global poverty. It is an attribute of an Olympic Frame of Mind that is shared, honed, and studied by great athletes and social sector leaders alike and one in which Ias CEO of a philanthropic foundation that aims to make a meaningful difference in the lives of the worlds poorest people by multiplying the impact of high-performing leaderstake a particular interest.

The Risk of Creating Interference

The importance of focus to an athlete, or anyone who wishes to excel at a high level, is clear and often rooted in physical routine. Phelps described it as training, making sure you're loose, stretching, lifting, whatever you can always, always, always try and do. Others work on focus through goal-setting; meditation; imagery, or envisioning the actions they need to undertake and the outcome they hope to attain; and even self-talk, in which they offer self-affirmations or simply remind themselves where their focus should be. But shutting out distractions and silencing doubts so as to maintain this focus is a tremendous challenge, especially under the Olympic spotlighta truth starkly highlighted by the star gymnast Simone Biless sudden (and lauded) decision to drop out of team competition. "Gymnastics probably more than any other sport ... requires laser, pinpoint focus," the mental training expert Robert Andrews, who worked with Biles for four years, told Reuters. "Being a global presence, the greatest of all time, all that starts creating interference."

Avoiding interference is far easier said than done, but experts do offer solid advice. Indeed, from time immemorial, coaches and philosophers alike have warned against the human tendency to look over ones shoulder to compare oneself to others. Comparison puts the focus on the wrong thing and is at best an unhealthy distraction; at worst, it is debilitating and counterproductive. Social media, of course, has greatly enhanced the ability to compare and simultaneously exacerbated its negative impact. Those prone to compare tend to put less emphasis on their process and preparation and more on the final outcome. Michael Phelps knows this so well that he once told reporters he doesnt compare himself to anyoneeven himself. "I know it won't be eight medals again, he said, referencing his eight golds at the 2008 Beijing Olympics. If you want to compare me to that, that's your decision, not mine. I'm going out there to try to accomplish the things that I have in my mind and in my heart."

US swimmer Michael Phelps competes in the men's 400m individual medley final swimming event at the ... [+] London 2012 Olympic Games on July 28, 2012 in London.

Targeted Focus in The Social Sector

Great social sector leaders likewise put on blinders and focus on their goalsand ensure that their organizations do the same. William Moore, the CEO of the Eleanor Crook Foundation (ECF), is an ardent and vocal advocate of the importance of focus. Indeed, when he assumed his position in 2015, it was with the aim of giving ECF, which had worked on global hunger issues, a more targeted focusthat of fighting to end global malnutrition through research, policy analysis, and advocacy.

Moore likewise pushes for more focus in the global nutrition sector. In my 2020 interview with himand in his own writingMoore emphasizes the need for the sector to focus its efforts by eschewing an ever-broadening quest to attack malnutrition in every form and from every angle [that] has led to a Christmas tree-decorating approach to nutrition program design. He argues that instead of adding, and hoping to scale, more interventionsfrom nutrition counseling to village savings-and-loan associationsthe sector should subtract to focus on the highest-impact opportunities. We cant lose our focus, he urges. We cant do everything, everywhere, all the time. I couldnt agree more. In fact, a fundamental axiom of corporate strategy is that more-focused strategies outperform less-focused ones and, as Bill Meehan and I argued in our book Engine of Impact, this applies equally to nonprofit organizations.

Raj Panjabi, who cofounded the organization Last Mile Health (LMH) in 2007 and served as its CEO for 14 years, also excels at putting on blinders. LMH exists to bring health-care services to the most remote parts of Africa, and during his tenure Panjabi retained a laser focus on this goal. He even turned down funding that would have quadrupled his budget because it would have taken LMH down a path that wasnt aligned with its mission or competencies. This was a strategic organizational decision, to be sure. But, as I noted previously it was made easier by Panjabis mental approach, which enabled him to choose the harder, but ultimately more effective, path for LMH. In 2021, Panjabi stepped down from LMH to lead the Presidents Malaria Initiative. In that role, he is bringing his focus to the global effort to eliminate malaria in part by reaching the unreached in rural areas.

Dr. Raj Panjabi, Co-Founder, Last Mile Health, speaks onstage during the TIME 100 Health Summit in ... [+] New York City.

The ability to focus on the controllables is essential to success for athletes, leaders, and organizations. Yet the ability to focus is to some extent a privilege: Those who live in poverty are at an inherent disadvantage when trying to focus. This point is made by the Nobel Prize winning economists Abhijit V. Banerjee and Esther Duflo in their seminal book Poor Economics. The real advantage of those of us who are not poor, they suggest, comes not so much from our educations or the things we know, but from the multitude of things we take for grantedlike living in houses into which clean water is piped and dirty water taken away (though we have little clue how this actually works). Or having doctors we can largely rely on, companies that reward us for exercising, and no need to worry where our next meal will come from. This privilege, they argue, makes it far easier for us to make the right decisions in life, and a key element in poverty reduction is to give the poor the same freedom. Because, as Banerjee and Duflo underscore:

Arent we, those who live in the rich world, the constant beneficiaries of paternalism now so thoroughly embedded into the system that we hardly notice it? It not only ensures that we take care of ourselves better than if we had to be on top of every decision, but also, by freeing us from having to think about these issues, it gives us the mental space we need to focus on the rest of our lives.

Esther Duflo and Abhijit Banerjee answer questions during a press conference at MIT on October 14, ... [+] 2019 in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Originally posted here:
Focus On What You Can Control - Forbes

MILAS, Turkey, Aug 4 (Reuters) - Turkey is battling the worst wildfires in its history, President Tayyip Erdogan said on Wednesday, as fires spread to a power station in the country's southwest after reducing swathes of coastal forest to ashes.

Fanned by high temperatures and a strong, dry wind, the fires have forced thousands of Turks and foreign tourists to flee homes and hotels near the Aegean and Mediterranean coasts. Eight people have died in the blazes since last week.

Planes and dozens of helicopters have joined scores of emergency crews on the ground to battle the fires, but Erdogan's government has faced criticism over the scale and speed of the response.

More than a week after the first fires broke out, 16 were still burning on Wednesday, the forestry minister said.

"The fires that happened this year never happened in our history," Erdogan told reporters in a televised interview. "This is the largest (outbreak)."

In the last two weeks, fires in Turkey have burnt more than three times the area affected in an average year, a European fire agency said. Neighbouring countries have also battled blazes fanned by heatwaves and strong winds.

A fire spread into a coal-fired power plant east of Bodrum in southwest Turkey after burning nearby since Tuesday, the local mayor said.

"Flames have entered the thermal power plant," said Muhammet Tokat, mayor of the town of Milas, adding that the plant was being evacuated.

Earlier, environmentalists said they were concerned about the impact if the fire spread to the plant's coal storage unit.

"Harmful gases could spread to the atmosphere if coal burns in an uncontrolled way," activist Deniz Gumusel said.

Tanks with flammable materials at the plant were emptied as a precaution, a reporter with Demiroren news agency said, and ditches had been dug as firebreaks.

Local officials, many from the opposition Republican People's Party (CHP), have complained that the government response has been slow or inadequate.

Firefighting planes from Spain and Croatia joined teams from Russia, Iran, Ukraine and Azerbaijan this week to battle blazes, after Turkey requested European support.

Opposition parties criticised Erdogan and his government for depleting firefighting resources over the years. Thousands also took to social media calling for Erdogan to step down, while others criticised the lack of resources and what they called inadequate preparations.

The government has defended its response to the wildfires, saying its efforts have been planned and coordinated.

Addional reporting by Yesim Dikmen; Editing by Dominic Evans, Janet Lawrence and David Gregorio

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

See original here:
Turkish wildfires are worst ever, Erdogan says, as power plant breached - Reuters

TEHRAN - For Ali Hedieloo, a 40-year-old making wooden furniture in Iran's capital, Instagram is more than just a surfeit of glossy images. Like an estimated 1 million other Iranians, its how he finds customers, as the app has exploded into a massive e-commerce service in the sanctions-hit country.

But now, the social media platform has come under threat. Iran moved last week toward further government restrictions on Instagram and other apps, as hardline lawmakers agreed to discuss a bill that many fear will undermine communication, wipe out livelihoods and open the door to the banning of key social media tools.

I and the people working here are likely to lose our jobs if this bill becomes effective," said Hedieloo from his dimly lit workshop in the southern suburbs of Tehran, where he sands bleached wood and snaps photos of adorned desks to advertise.

The bill has yet to be approved by Irans hardliner dominated parliament, but it is already stirring anxiety among young Iranians, avid social media users, online business owners and entrepreneurs. Iran is a country with some 94 million internet devices in use among its over 80 million people. Nearly 70% of Iran's population uses smartphones.

Over 900,000 Iranians have signed a petition opposing the bill. The protest comes at a tense time for Iran, with Ebrahim Raisi, the former judiciary chief and hard-line protege of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, assuming the countrys highest civilian position this week. Journalists, civil society advocates and government critics have raised the alarm about the possible increase of social repression once he takes office.

The draft legislation, first proposed this spring by conservative lawmakers, requires major foreign tech giants such as Facebook to register with the Iranian government and be subject to its oversight and data ownership rules.

Companies that host unregistered social media apps in Iran would risk penalties, with authorities empowered to slow down access to the companies' services as a way to force them to comply. Lawmakers have noted that the crippling U.S. sanctions on Iran make the registration of American tech companies in the country impossible, effectively ensuring their ban.

The law would also criminalize the sale and distribution of virtual private networks and proxies a critical way Iranians access long-blocked social media platforms like Facebook, Telegram, Twitter and YouTube. It also would bar government officials from running accounts on banned social media platforms, which they now use to communicate with citizens and the press. Even the office of the supreme leader has a Twitter account with over 890,000 followers.

And finally, the bill takes control of the internet away from the civilian government and places it under the armed forces.

The bill's goal, according to its authors, is to protect users and their rights. Hard-liners in the government have long viewed social messaging and media services as part of a soft war by the West against the Islamic Republic. Over time, Iran has created what some have called the halal internet the Islamic Republic's own locally controlled version of the internet aimed at restricting what the public can see.

Supporters of the bill, such as hard-line lawmaker Ali Yazdikhah, have hailed it as a step toward an independent Iranian internet, where people will start to prefer locally developed services" over foreign companies.

There is no reason to worry, online businesses will stay, and even we promise that they will expand too," he said.

Internet advocates, however, fear the measures will tip the country toward an even more tightly controlled model like China, whose Great Firewall blocks access to thousands of foreign websites and slows others.

Irans outgoing Information Technology Minister Mohammad Javad Azari Jahromi, whom the hard-line judiciary summoned for prosecution earlier this year over his refusal to block Instagram, warned that the bill would curtail access to information and lead to full-blown bans of popular messaging apps. In a letter to Raisi last month, he urged the president-elect to reconsider the bill.

Facebook, which owns Instagram, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Social media is a highly contested space in Iran, where the government retains tight control over newspapers and remains the only entity allowed to broadcast on television and radio. Over recent years, anti-government protesters have used social media as a communication tool to mobilize and spread their message, prompting authorities to cripple internet services.

During the turmoil in the fall of 2019, for instance, the government imposed a near-complete internet blackout. Even scattered demonstrations, such as the recent protests over water shortages in Iran's southwest, have seen disruptions of mobile internet service.

But many ordinary Iranians, reeling from harsh American sanctions that have severed access to international banking systems and triggered runaway inflation, remain more preoccupied with the bill's potential financial fallout.

As the coronavirus ravages Iran, a growing number of people like Hedieloo have turned to Instagram to make a living tutoring and selling homemade goods and art. Over 190,000 businesses moved online over the past year.

Although much about the bill's fate remains uncertain, experts say it already has sent a chill through commerce on Instagram, where once-hopeful users now doubt they have a future on the app.

I and everyone else who is working in cyberspace is worried, said Milad Nouri, a software developer and technology analyst. This includes a teenager playing online games, a YouTuber making money from their channel, an influencer, an online shop based on Instagram.

He added: "Everyone is somehow stressed."

More:
Iranians fear new bill will restrict social media further | MEO - Middle East Online

Ninety-nine words to wipe out 21 years walking hand in hand...not to mention 810 professional games, 683 goals, 10 Liga titles, seven Copas del Rey, four Champions League crowns and three FIFA Club World Cups.

Barcelona's terse statement on Thursday appears to leave no doubt, right down to the headline on the club website -- Leo Messi not staying at FC Barcelona -- that arguably the greatest single club career of any player ever has come to an end.

- Sources: Messi's Barcelona deal in limbo- Social media reacts to Messi news- Messi timeline: Breaking down his 20 years at Barcelona

But, as with Messi's own "Burofax" incident less than 12 months ago, there's more here than meets the eye.

Q: A few weeks ago everybody was reporting that Messi and the club had agreed to a new contract. Spanish media were hailing today as "Messi Day" -- the day when it would all become official. What happened?

A: All we know for certain right now is that, according to Barcelona, the club are unable to register the contract due to the Spanish league's rules on player registration, despite having reached an agreement for a new five-year deal with Messi. They don't go into specifics but it's safe to assume that they're referring to LaLiga's version of the "salary cap" which limits spending on wages and player acquisition costs based on projected club revenue and costs. And since Barcelona are in dire financial straits -- with more than a billion dollars of debt, of which as much as $800 million is described as short-term -- Messi's new contract won't get the green light. Which means he will leave.

Q: But how did this happen? Surely they knew what the limits were heading into the summer and the Messi negotiations...

A: Yeah, that's one of the mysteries here. Especially since they spent $9.6 million on Emerson from Real Betis and also made three free agent signings -- Memphis Depay from Lyon, and Sergio Aguero and Eric Garcia from Manchester City -- and the first two come with big salaries. The obvious question is this: If Messi was your priority (and he obviously was), why would you commit around $50m in wages and the Emerson fee to sign those four other players if it was going to put you over the cap? That's why plenty are speculating there's something else afoot.

Q: Such as?

A: Some reports are suggesting that there was a last minute hitch in the Messi deal, in terms of commissions to be paid and that he wasn't entirely happy with some of the club's transfer dealings this summer (even though they did sign his buddy and Argentina teammate, Aguero). And, because the club could never blame Messi, they're blaming LaLiga's rules instead. There may be some truth in that, but a much more plausible explanation may be the tense relationship with LaLiga and that it's a power play between Barca president Joan Laporta and Liga boss Javier Tebas.

2 Related

Q: What's that about?

A: In one word: control. Barcelona are, along with Real Madrid and Juventus, one of only three clubs who have not dropped out of the Super League and, in fact, are taking legal action to push their case. Tebas, as you'd expect, is dead set against the Super League as he believes it would hurt the competitive balance of LaLiga. Perhaps more important than that is the deal Tebas struck with a private equity firm, CVC Capital Partners, which would see LaLiga receive a cash infusion of around $3.2 billion in return for 10% of future revenues and a 10% stake in a newly formed commercial company. Barcelona, like Real Madrid (who, maybe not coincidentally, issued their own statement lamenting the deal on Thursday) are dead-set against the CVC agreement.

Q: Why don't they like the deal? Don't they want the cash?

A: I'm sure they do, but they also say Tebas negotiated the agreement without their knowledge and that it hands the future of the clubs over to private investors. They're likely also unhappy with how LaLiga and CVC might redistribute funds going forward. The deal now needs to be approved by the clubs and Real Madrid and Barcelona are likely to lead the "no" front.

Q: I get that, but how does Messi come into it?

A: Simply put, LaLiga, as a product, is less valuable without Messi. His departure, or even just the possibility of his departure, could turn public opinion against Tebas and his plans. Barcelona and Real Madrid generate the bulk of Liga revenue and a sizable chunk of that trickles down to other clubs. Messi leaving wouldn't just hurt Barcelona, it would hurt LaLiga. And not just in terms of image, but in commercial terms. That's another of the theories being bandied about. But there's a third, somewhat simpler scenario that may be the most plausible.

Q: What's that?

A: It's hard to believe that, having had months to talk to Messi and his family, Barcelona would not get their sums right and suddenly realize they couldn't afford him. The structure of the five-year deal they agreed suggests they were careful to stay within the cap. Plus, the transfer windows is still open until September. They could, conceivably, move on other players to keep him around. It wouldn't be easy, because the guys they'd like to transfer out of Barca are on high salaries and few clubs could afford them, but there are ways to do it. Not to mention the fact that if Messi was as committed to staying as they suggest, he could lower his wage demands or include more bonuses in his package or whatever. Instead, they're announcing that they're throwing in the towel now.

Q: And what does that suggest?

A: That it's a strategic move to spook Tebas. Either within the context of CVC or the Super League or, more simply, in terms of cutting them some slack on the salary cap. This feels like giving up without a fight. And I can't see Barcelona -- or Messi -- doing that.

Q: OK, let's assume you're wrong. Let's assume it really is over. Where could he go to next?

A: The usual suspects will be mooted: Paris Saint-Germain, Manchester City, maybe Manchester United, maybe a move to Major League Soccer. But the fact of the matter is that Messi became a free agent on July 1 and, legally, from Jan. 1, he could have signed a pre-contract with anyone. And, while there may have been interest from City 12 months ago, in the Burofax days, it's not as if clubs were beating a path to his door in the past six months. Why? Because many believed he was committed to staying at Barcelona. Now, most clubs have made other plans. City are pursuing Harry Kane. PSG are trying to extend Kylian Mbappe's deal before he becomes a free agent next June (and they've committed huge amounts in salary on big name free agents like Georginio Wijnaldum, Gianluigi Donnarumma and Sergio Ramos). Signing Messi would be a huge undertaking, you don't just magic up close to half a billion dollars over the next five years out of nowhere.

Q: So what's going to happen?

A: I'm purely speculating here, we may know more when Laporta addresses the media on Friday and, by the way, we haven't heard from Messi himself yet. But fundamentally we have a situation where -- at least according to Barca's statement -- Messi wants to stay and the club want to keep him, but the league won't allow it, even though his departure would hurt everyone, league included. Does that sound right or logical to you? No, it doesn't. Because it isn't. My guess is come Sept. 1, he'll still be a Barcelona player. Either because he will have restructured the contract they agreed or because Barca will have recouped some transfer fees or because LaLiga will have revised their salary cap to accommodate the club. Or a combination of all three.

Originally posted here:
Messi to leave Barcelona: Breaking down the scenarios on how this saga will play out - ESPN

Facebook gives people a way to stay connected and share photos, stories, and opinions.

And according to a survey conducted in June, its also an avenue to influence whether people get vaccinated against COVID-19.

The survey, led by The COVID States Project, found that people who get most of their news via Facebook are less likely than the average American to be vaccinated against COVID-19.

Katherine Ognyanova, PhD, a co-author of the survey results, is an associate professor of communication at the Rutgers School of Communication and Information and part of a coalition of researchers from Rutgers-New Brunswick, Northeastern, Harvard, and Northwestern universities.

She said the findings suggest theres a considerable group of vaccine-hesitant people who get their COVID-19 information primarily from social media.

This could be because they encounter more bad information on those platforms. False stories can spread fast and reach large groups of people online. It could also be because Americans who do not trust traditional institutions (mainstream media, the government, health experts) rely primarily on social media for their news. Most likely, it is some combination of the two, and we need more research to better understand whats happening, Ognyanova told Healthline.

As part of the survey, respondents were asked questions about sources they use for news and COVID-19 information, including, Facebook, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, the Biden administration, and Newsmax.

Researchers discovered that Facebook is a major source of information, comparable with CNN or Fox News.

They also found that Facebook users are less likely to be vaccinated against COVID-19 than those who get their COVID-19 information from Fox News.

Additionally, Ognyanova said that Newsmax was the only source in the survey whose viewers noted lower vaccination levels and higher vaccine resistance than respondents who turn to Facebook for health news.

Misinformation in any form always has the potential to harm, sometimes with deadly consequences. This is especially true when we talk about misinformation that steers people away from seeking appropriate medical care, Dr. Joseph M. Pierre, professor in UCLAs department of psychiatry and biobehavioral sciences, and author of the column Psych Unseen, told Healthline.

As of June 2021, 99 percent of COVID-19 deaths were occurring among unvaccinated people, he added.

Statistics like that speak for themselves, Pierre said.

The COVID States Project survey found that respondents who rely exclusively on Facebook for pandemic information were more likely to believe misinformation, such as claims that the COVID-19 vaccines will alter DNA or that they contain microchips to track people.

Online misinformation can increase the levels of uncertainty among people who are vaccine-hesitant, and harden the conviction of those who are vaccine-resistant. To be sure, it is only one among many factors that drive peoples decisions to get vaccinated. But it remains an important issue to tackle (along with many other logistic challenges) if we want to put the pandemic behind us, Ognyanova said.

Mistrust in media is another factor that leads to vulnerability toward misinformation.

According to the survey, people who rely on Facebook are less trusting of the media.

Thirty-seven percent of the people who got their news exclusively through Facebook in the preceding 24 hours said they trust the media some or a lot compared with 47 percent for everyone else.

Additionally, the survey found that:

We live in an era of rampant mistrust of government, of the media, of scientific institutions, and of our neighbors. Within the free market of ideas that is the internet, that means that counter-information in the form of misinformation and deliberate disinformation will be there to fill the void that mistrust leaves behind, Pierre said.

Despite efforts from platforms like Facebook to stop misinformation, it continues to spread because of how quickly it can reach millions of people when shared by popular influencers or posted on Facebook groups with millions of members before its removed.

Pierre added that misinformation spreads faster and further than accurate news does.

Because of this, disinformation has become a profitable industry.

It sells. And any time something is profitable and still mostly unregulated its unlikely to stop, Pierre said.

Ognyanova agreed, stating that misinformation is unlikely to go away anytime soon due to financial or ideological incentives to produce it.

In the context of health, harmful claims can get elevated and distributed by people who genuinely believe they are spreading useful information, she said.

Solutions that combine multiple approaches, such as technological, social, regulatory, and educational, are the best way to curb misinformation, said Ognyanova.

Misinformation corrections and general health recommendations are most persuasive when they come from a trusted party. Corporate and government actors need to work together, as well as involving researchers and teachers, she said.

Pierre said institutions of authority have to address mistrust by being transparent and engaging the public.

Educating the public about how to separate reliable information from bogus information in online spaces and the media is also needed. This involves learning how to read past headlines, how to separate facts and opinions, how to spot bias, and basic data reasoning, said Pierre.

Thats something that, for the most part, isnt part of education at all. The reality is that this might take a generation to fix, assuming we got started now, he said.

Additionally, he pointed to a debate regarding misinformation.

Should [there] be limits on the free market of ideas or what I call because its so chaotic, rewarding the loudest and most outrageous voices the flea market of ideas? Pierre said.

This debate brings up questions like:

I say no, but thats something were all going to have to decide as a society, Pierre said.

Next time youre scrolling through Facebook or another platform and you see a friend share misinformation, Pierre suggested that you think before you click and read before you share.

I do think theres a responsibility to counter misinformation in its place that is, calling out misinformation when we see it posted online by people we know but theres always a risk of getting mired into unproductive debate and conflict, he said.

While Ognyanova believes misinformation corrections can be effective when they come from people who are close to us, she said if youre going to correct a friend, being able to provide not just evidence of the truth but also give context and an accessible explanation may be most effective.

Also very important: We want to do all of that without antagonizing the friend who shared the story. In the end, even if that person is not persuaded, others who see the information may be, she said.

Cathy Cassata is a freelance writer who specializes in stories around health, mental health, medical news, and inspirational people. She writes with empathy and accuracy and has a knack for connecting with readers in an insightful and engaging way. Read more of her work here.

Read the original:
People Less Likely to Be Vaccinated When Facebook Is Main News Source - Healthline