Psychology is the field that teaches us about how human beings act and the reasons for those actions. Its the study of human behavior, and it helps us understand ourselves on a deeper level. But did you know that there are different types of psychology? When we think of psychology, we might think about learning about different kinds of mental health disorders. But there are so many different types of psychology out there. In this article, were going to examine five different types of psychology that you may not know about, and you can learn more.

Clinical psychology deals with science and handling psychological issues. Its also called psychotherapy or counseling. Clinical psychologists diagnose and treat mental health disorders. They also perform research and find ways to help us learn more in-depth about human behavior. A clinical psychologist does not prescribe medication to clients, but they utilize various psychological techniques. They might practice a kind of behavior therapy or psychoanalysis. Typically clinical psychologists hold a Ph.D., and they may see clients in a private practice setting. If theyre not working in prior practice, they will be conducting psychological research or testing, and you may find them working at universities teaching psychology to students.

Biopsychology examines the brain and how it influences the way that we think and feel its a combination of neuroscience and clinical psychology. We know so little about the brain, and we are learning more every day. Biopsychologists focus on the mind-body connection. They want to understand how our brains influence our emotions and cognitive processes. They can be found researching to understand how our brains are impacting our daily functioning and our emotional life. Biopsychologists may become neuroscientists, evolutionary psychologists, or comparative psychologists.

Experimental psychologists are like detectives. They work to understand the underlying causes of human behavior. They often work in laboratories and conduct research. They study humans and animals and understand their subjects by creating various trials. They focused a lot on evolution and understanding the significance behind certain types of human behavior. As the term would suggest, they perform a lot of experiments. Experimental psychologists Are a bit like philosophers. They study theoretical topics and work to understand our perceptions, memories, and cognitive processes. Some experimental psychologist hyper-focused on one question and spend years researching that hypothesis. This is one of the fields that focuses heavily on research.

Educational psychology explores human behavior in an educational environment. These clinicians analyze learning disabilities and actions that can be problematic in the teen years. Educational psychologists focus primarily on a younger age group, such as children and adolescents. You can find them conducting assessments in various settings. Some educational psychologists work in preschools, some of them work in community centers, as private consultants, or in college environments. Many educational psychologists work with children on a one on one basis. They can also involve the parents as well as the teachers in their treatment plans.

Social psychologists focus on people that live in a community. They are similar to a sociologist. They explore how people within a community are interdependent on one another. They focus on political issues and environmental factors. Social psychologists rely on the scientific method. They focus on gaining empirical evidence for their hypotheses. This type of mental health professional studies how human behavior is caused or affected by the community around them. They take into account social and cultural norms.

Psychology is a fascinating field. It is the study of human behavior, and it has many sub-specialty is. Whether you are an educational psychologist or a clinical psychologist, youre still studying the way that humans think and act. Another way to gain insight into your behavior is to go to therapy or counseling. Whether you see a counselor in your local area or try online therapy, you can better understand your motivations by going to therapy.

Read more here:
Five Different Types of Psychology and What They Mean - The Good Men Project

You ever notice rhat some memories tend to be stronger than others?

What sort of things do you remember?

You remember events in your life that had a lot of feelings associated with them.

You remember the death of your pet like it was yesterday. All the nights spent sitting on the couch watching "Wheel Of Fortune" i ts just a blur.

Researchers have studied this in rats. They found that rats remembered things better if they experienced a rush of adrenaline.

In those moments with strong memories, it feels like time slows down. Time doesnt actually slow down time is linear. But human beings experience time as flexible. Time also speeds up when things are boring.

Im fond of saying that all of finance, or at least the interesting part, is about human behavior. I find the daily fluctuations of stocks and credit spreads less interesting the older I get. And I think finance is more depraved the older I get. But the human behavior part fascinates me.

Millers Planet

The fact that time stretches and compresses isnt news to anyone whos traded options.

In the world of options, time and volatility work in opposite directions. As time passes, options decay. As volatility increases, options increase in value. All stuff you learned in class.

But if you think about it, volatility increasing is another way of saying that theres a lot of s--- going on. Things are crazy. Options increase in valuewhich is really like saying that time is slowing down.

Which is exactly how we experience it. Of all my days trading on Wall Street, what are the times that I remember most? The financial crisis, naturally. There was a lot of adrenaline associated with that.

We all have strong memories of it. And while we experienced it, it seemed like time was slowing down which was reflected in options prices. They were the highest in recorded history.

Finance is simply human behavior.

If I think back over the last 10 years, what do I remember?

All the crazy times. Nobody remembers the stuff in between. Old-timers like me remember all the way back to 1997 and 1998, with the Asian Financial Crisis and LTCM and the Russian debt default. Its the accidents that help us mark our time in the markets.

Perspective

We all perceive things differently. As I just demonstrated, we all perceive time differently.

We also might perceive color differently we just dont know. There is no way to know that the red I see is the red you see.

We all have different perspectives, especially when it comes to financial markets. I might find a stock attractive that you find unattractive. Happens all the time.

A lot of financial analysis is searching for some objective truth in the markets. This is what the value people try to do. They try to identify the correct value of a security and then buy it if its underpriced.

But there really is no objective truth in finance just a set of ever-changing perspectives.

Some examples:

Target is up over 90%, year to date:

Is Targets business 90% better? Is it earning 90% more revenue? Of course not more people find the stock attractive and fewer find it unattractive.

Pharmaceutical giant Bristol-Myers is up 48% in the last couple of months:

Again, is their business 50% better? No.

People have created several models to explain stock market behavior. Keyness beauty pageant is at the top of the list. I will always catch a beauty pageant if its on TV. The goal isnt picking the most attractive contestant. Its picking the contestant that the judges will find most attractive. Its a great exercise.

But I dont think thats the right model.

I came up with my own model and gave it to the world on the Bloomberg Opinion page. You can read about it here. But I feel like its incomplete, too.

Sentiment also plays a role big turning points are always at sentiment extremes.

Im not sure what the answer is or if there even is an answer. I think about it all the time. People smarter than me spend even more time thinking about it.

Maybe there is no Grand Unified Theory maybe there are regimes in the financial markets, and sometimes some things work and sometimes other things work.

Maybe the rules change all the time and there is nothing we can do about it.

I am not even sure buy-and-hold and dollar-cost averaging will work going forward.

And thats what you learn when you have 20 years of experience that you actually know nothing.

That said, one thing I do know is that the adrenaline rush reckless traders get throwing money at hot stocks is not something to aspire to. Its much better to even out your odds with a diversified, balanced portfolio and a long-term view.

Get Contrarian Investment Ideas from a Wall Street Veteran

Jared Dillian writes The 10th Man, a free weekly newsletter for contrarian investors. Every Thursday, he delivers a torpedo of incisive commentary that crushes consensus thinking and exposes the true workings of Mr. Market. Subscribe now!

2020 Newsmax Finance. All rights reserved.

Read more:
After 20 Years of Trading, You Learn That You Actually Know Nothing - Newsmax

Anne Innis Dagg was the first female biologist to study giraffes; while all the men who preceded her had observed firsthand that male giraffes are super queer (their primary form of play is a game dubbed "penis fencing," which is exactly what it sounds like), only Dagg was willing to write it down and publish it.

Dagg's work on giraffes -- several of the seminal books on the animals -- was initially mocked or ignored, partly because of her pioneering approach of living among the animals (as opposed to observing them at a distance) offended the establishment; partly because of her gender.

Though Dagg earned a PhD and taught for decades, she was denied tenure. She continued to produce challenging, brave, brilliant work at the intersection of biology and gender politics, ranging over both scholarly and popular works. In particular, she specialized in pointing out the lack of rigor in her male colleagues' work when discussing sex and gender among animals, and how that spilled over into the way the field was organized, and gender bias within research institutions and in research publishing.

Her 2004 book, Love of Shopping is Not a Gene, is an absolute must-read book on the subject, addressing the total absence of rigor and falsifiability in hypotheses from male biologists to explain human gender and power roles with reference to animal behavior and/or the imaginary lives of early hominids -- howlers like "Rape is genetic" or "Black people are genetically destined to have lower IQ scores than white people."

These comforting fairy tales (I always think of them as being reducible to, "But honey, it's not my fault I'm fucking my undergrads, it's because of the chimps!") are especially in vogue today, as white nationalists, plutocrats (and their bootlickers), and other advocates for gross inequality and population-scale subjugation seek to justify their ideology by claiming that it is biologically determined, and any attempt to change it is literally unnatural. Exhibit A for this is Jordan Peterson, whose obsession with a single species of lobsters is the founding myth of a transphobic, misogynist cult.

Dagg anticipated this debate decades in advance and repeatedly demolished its arguments for anyone who would listen, wielding science to slice through the self-serving bullshit of mediocre thinkers who want so desperately for their privilege to be the result of a biological process and not their own sociopathy.

Despite organized campaigns to marginalize Dagg and her work, she never gave up and was hugely influential on all kinds of scholars and thinkers. She was my own undergrad advisor at the University of Waterloo's Independent Studies program, and was an excellent mentor to me there. More broadly, she inspired generations of largely female giraffe biologists (I just met a giraffe keeper at Walt Disney World's Animal Kingdom who was a fan!), serving as a mentor and inspiration.

Dagg just received the Order of Canada, the second-highest honor awarded to Canadians (after the Order of Merit). The honor comes on the heels of The Woman Who Loves Giraffes, a documentary on Dagg's life and work.

wonderful news, seriously. Dagg is such a clear, uncompromising advocate for a rigorous approach to biology both as a means of understanding other animals and as a means for understand humans -- and is such a strong tonic against those who would abuse this tool for making sense of human behavior and social organization -- and she has accepted her marginalization as the price for her commitment to the truth.

Anne Dagg, Queen of Giraffes, appointed to Order of Canada among recipients with global influence [Stephanie Levitz/The National Post]

Wanda Diaz Merced is an astronomer at the International Astronomical Union (IAU) Office for Astronomy Outreach in Mitaka, Japan. Diaz Merced is blind and uses a technique to transform data from astronomical surveys into sounds for analysis. Over at Nature, Elizabeth Gibney interviewed Merced about how converting astronomical data into sound could bring discoveries that []

In the Galapagos Islands, a shoreside crane toppled over while loading a shipping container onto a barge, capsizing the boat and causing a terrible oil spill of hundreds of gallons of diesel fuel. It was Charles Darwins 1835 studies of the Galapagos Islandss biodiversity that sparked his theory of evolution by natural selection. From ABC []

Photographer Eric Brummel created this magnificent time-lapse video of the Milky Way in which the sky is stabilized so you can experience the Earths rotation. He captured the footage at Fonts Point, Anza-Borrego Desert State Park, California. From Universe Today: Eric created this time-lapse by using a star-tracker with his camera. A star-tracker rotates the []

Brush up on those interview skills all you like, but all the charm in the world wont help you past the primary obstacle for modern job seekers: Applicant tracking systems. These bots comb online applications before a human ever sees them, searching for keywords that would indicate particular titles or skills. Thats where Rezi Rsum []

Details are the bane of any manager. Its tough to innovate when youve got invoices to approve, gripes to address and countless fires to put out on any number of projects. Here is where technology can actually help you, because businesses run better when they integrate all their procedures, inflow and outflow under one system. []

You may have heard of air fryers, but theyre a lot more versatile than the name implies. Healthier (and quicker!) french fries are just the tip of the iceberg with these innovative cookers, and here are six of our favorites. As if they needed any additional highlighting, you can save an extra 20% off the []

Read this article:
Anne Dagg, pioneering giraffe biologist and feminist critic of "evolutionary psychology" receives the Order of Canada - Boing Boing

Its can be useful and instructive to observe the turning of a decade by looking back on what life was like in America a mere 100 years ago.

On Jan. 2, 1920, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was 108.76. Today it is over 28,000 points.

In 1920, the U.S. had become an economic power, which is remarkable considering the bloody war to end all wars that ended just two years earlier. Republican presidents shifted their attention from foreign entanglements to economic growth (sound familiar?).

The beginning of the Roaring 20s featured new rights for women, including the right to vote, daring flapper outfits and cigarette smoking. It also included Prohibition, which lead to the rise of Al Capone and the Mafia. People should have been convinced that attempts to regulate human behavior by government fiat only works if the public is willing to obey the law, which in the case of liquor it clearly was not.

The one thing that hasnt changed in the last 100 years and, for that matter, since the first humans walked the Earth is human nature. One can change styles of clothing and hair, change modes of transportation, even change politicians, but human nature never changes. Greed, lust and the quest for power are embedded in each of us in every generation.

The impact of the Industrial Revolution found more people living in big cities than on farms for the first time beginning in 1920. That year also launched what we today call the consumer society. Americas total wealth more than doubled between 1920 and 1929.

As the website history.com notes: People from coast to coast bought the same goods (thanks to nationwide advertising and the spread of chain stores), listened to the same music, did the same dances and even used the same slang. Many Americans were uncomfortable with this urban, sometimes racy mass culture, and for many people in the U.S., the 1920s brought more conflict than celebration.

Isnt it the same today? Have we learned nothing? The tension between people with opposing political and social views and religious beliefs has increased these last 100 years because of contemporary social media and the 24/7 news cycle in which revolution sells better than resolution.

Cars, washing machines, new forms of birth control and other creations gave especially women new freedoms. Radio united the nation; and phonograph records, which sold 100 million in 1927 alone, created a common culture, even if some older people didnt like the modern music.

As with Frank Sinatra and Elvis Presley in the 1940s and 50s, some older folks in the 1920s rejected the dance hall lifestyle and what they saw as the vulgarity and depravity of jazz music and the moral erosion they claimed it caused. But for the younger generation, it was a new world in which the future looked bright.

What will America be like in 2120? In 1920 no one could have foreseen a Great Depression, or a second World War, much less the prosperity and cultural changes that would come, or the threat of nuclear annihilation.

The saying that the more things change, the more they remain the same has never seemed more accurate and providential.

Happy new decade!

Follow this link:
Opinion/Column: Looking ahead, looking back: Life 100 years ago - The Daily Progress

Two threats loom large as the third decade of the 21st century begins. While they manifest in starkly different ways, both are the product of human behavior. Both will profoundly shape our lives in the years to come and there is little sign that we as a species are addressing and mitigating the consequences of either challenge. And, most alarming, only collective action will work. No matter how motivated some of us may be, failure to work together will ensure that these challenges overwhelm us.

The first challenge is that of climate change. 2019 will be remembered as the year that we passed a tipping point in global warming. Global greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise yet governments continue to refuse to take the threat seriously.

Experts believe that climate change constitutes an existential threat to civilization and the world faces a planetary emergency. Average temperatures around the world have already risen 1 degree Celsius from pre-industrial levels and experts believe those emissions must be cut by 25 percent over the next decade to keep warming under 2 degrees; they must be halved to keep temperatures from rising just 1.5 degrees.

Climate change is transforming the planet. Biodiversity is experiencing an existential threat, with 1 million plant and animal species at risk of extinction. Oceans are changing too as waters become warmer. Fish, coral and other forms of marine life are migrating or dying. Ecosystems are being altered and the effects are impossible to predict.

Meanwhile, polar ice sheets are melting, with the thaw in Antarctica threatening to raise sea levels by more than five meters by 2300. New, more accurate measurements indicate that far more coastal land is at risk of submersion. In Japan, for example, 27 percent of the population of Nagoya will be affected by rising sea levels, along with 26 percent of Osaka residents. The country will lose nearly all its beaches leaving less than 10 meters in half its coastal zones by 2065.

Yet despite the growing evidence of the threat posed by climate change, governments procrastinate and pass the buck. There is no sign of the emergency response that is required.

Even Japan, which has prided itself for having a special relationship with the environment and has historically led in environmental diplomacy, is guilty of complacency. Japan relies on coal for about one-third of its electricity generation it currently has 46.5 gigawatts of coal capacity and another 11 gigawatts is planned. It is the only Group of Seven economy that is building new coal plants and it is a major exporter of coal plant technology. Japan should be leading the effort to respond to this crisis. Instead, its energy polices may exacerbate it.

The second danger is the increasing role of technology in our daily lives and its almost infinite capacity for disruption. Ironically, while technology is heralded as the likely fix to climate ills, it has also been deployed in forms and ways that prevent the formation of consensus that would allow countries to tackle the problem. For example, the media has been weaponized to divide and alienate societies, tearing apart their social fabric and facilitating a slide into paralysis or chaos. Climate change is just one issue that can be used as a wedge to divide a nation.

But we must be alert to new dangers posed by emerging technologies. Privacy is disappearing as ubiquitous devices leave a digital footprint or fingerprint wherever we go, in the real world or online. Governments and businesses are acquiring deep and ever increasing insight into who we are, where we go and even how we think. That data is piling up and can be used to either improve our lives or invade them.

In some cases, the distinction between the two is blurred. The marriage of sensors, big data and AI offers the potential for real-time surveillance, which can provide unprecedented security or George Orwells Big Brother. This threat has long been mooted Orwell first published his dystopian take on the future in 1949 but the enabling capabilities now exist. Technological authoritarianism is a real prospect and for some countries it is an increasingly profitable export.

While these are two disparate threats, there is one common denominator: Both are man-made. And both will become even more threatening if we continue the laissez-faire approach that fails to intervene and bend both phenomena toward more sustainable trajectories.

Read more:
Collective action needed to meet existential threats - The Japan Times

Every year people come up with New Years Resolution ideas and set goals but they fail. Human behavior expert Dr. Alok Trivedi gives tips on how you can improve your life, stop procrastinating and not be overwhelmed by your resolutions.

For more information about Dr Alok Trivedi visit: Alignedperformanceinstitute.comLike Dr Trivedi on Facebook at: Facebook.com/Alok.trivedi.16Follow Dr Trivedi on Twitter at: Twitter.com/DrAlokTrivedi

Want to hear more of Mason? Check out:MasonVeraPaine.comfor the latest interviews. Like Mason on Facebook at:Facebook.com/MasonVeraPaineand follow her on Twitter at:Twitter.com/MasonVeraPaine. Interested in being a guest on the show or wish to send pitches contact us at: Contact@Masonverapaine.com

Read the original post:
How to achieve your New Year's Resolutions - WGN Radio - Chicago

The key benefit of Robotic Process Automation (RPA) is that it plays well with other existing technologies

In 2020, the automation market will see a shift from point solutions to more comprehensive offerings

The RPA market will reach $2.9 Bn by 2021

RPA market is evolving at a tremendous pace and is expected to grow at a CAGR of 20.3% between 2019 and 2025. This growth can be majorly attributed to how RPA streamlines and enhances legacy processes and results in high returns on investment (ROI).

Some of the key RPA trends to watch out in the year ahead are:

The key benefit of RPA is that it plays well with other existing technologies. RPA has the potential to adapt quickly to changing circumstances and learn accordingly, hence it enhances processes rather than replacing them. Since its not always feasible to redesign workflows from the ground up, automating inefficient processes with RPA can greatly improve productivity.

In 2020, the automation market will see a shift from point solutions to more comprehensive offerings that will address integration challenges and enable best-in-class features that enterprises require. Digital transformation is a journey. RPA implementation shouldnt be treated as a short term project to gain cost efficiency. It must be integrated in the processes from the beginning to avail comprehensive benefits.

Organizations across the globe are realizing the benefits of incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) within RPA framework to result in intelligent automation. Understanding the range of automation mechanisms, how they relate to one another and how they can be combined and coordinated is a major focus for hyper-automation. This allows software robots to mimic human behavior and handle complex use cases, which was earlier not possible without human intervention.

The emergence of autonomous things is a major landmark in technological progress. Early examples of this include autonomous drones and self-driving vehicles. In 2020, we expect a shift from stand-alone intelligent things to a swarm of collaborative intelligent things, with multiple devices working together, either independent of people or with minimum human input. In the future, autonomous things will go beyond process automation and integrate AI to deliver advanced behaviors that interact more naturally with the environment and people.

RPA taking away jobs is the most debated topic in the industry. It is anticipated that RPA will affect employment and half of the jobs will be replaced by automation. Contrary to popular beliefs, future trends suggest that there will be a collaboration between machines and humans in many areas. As a result, more jobs will be created by enhancing the nature of jobs and there will be a need for RPA and process experts to augment user interfaces and solve business problems.

As per Forrester, the RPA market will reach $2.9 Bn by 2021, which means RPA market will continue to grow at an exponential rate. There will be a sharp rise in adoption and implementation of RPA. It will be used for multiple processes in the organization across departments and it is expected to largely manage customer-focused and external processes.

Message from our partner

View original post here:
5 Robotic Process Automation Trends To Look For In 2020 - Inc42 Media

Love 'em or hate 'em, New Year's resolutions are here to stay, so I've got a few sports ones of my own.

New Year, new you that's what they say. Right?

Fitness. Eat healthier. Read more. Typically, some of the more popular New Year's resolutions you'll see and hear. But while we'd all benefit from the aforementioned declarations, I'm a sports writer, so let's narrow the scope to the people, places and things that reside in my world.

Much like the "real world," the sports universe is imperfect. People make mistakes, there are flawed performances, and despite sometimes century's worth of games played, tweaks are needed to even the most popular and successfully run competitions.

So while all the answers escape me, I have some, and I'll happily make suggestions as to the solutions for a handful of problems facing the sports world in 2020.

Let's begin with the worst rule in football: fumbling into and through the end zone. As it stands now, if a player who's inches from scoring a touchdown fumbles the ball and it rolls into and out of the end zone, the ball is turned over to the defense at their 20-yard line.

This is stupid for several reasons, but primarily because had the same thing occurred a millimeter short of pay-dirt, the offense retains possession at the point it went out of bounds.

So what gives? The defense never recovered the ball, so why should they be rewarded so handsomely for something that they'd see no reward for had it occurred in the field of play?

I'm not sure who conjured up this rule or how much they were drinking when they did, but this is a horrific tenet for which the punishment far exceeds the crime. Fix this, football. Give the offense the ball at the point of the fumble and right this obvious wrong in 2020.

Next, quit testing for marijuana.

I'm not even a "pot guy," but we're long beyond the point where the obvious pros to smoking weed don't outweigh the cons, so, by all means, let these professional athletes cope with pain in the least detrimental way possible.

Let's see, opiate addiction or habitual late-night munchies run? Feels like a no-brainer.

Next, people need to accept imperfection as it pertains to officiating. Everyone, in general, has fallen into this trap that refs, umps, linemen they've all gotten worse. No, television has gotten better, and when you slow things down and zoom in to the nth degree, you have the luxury of applying superhuman strength to human behavior. It's unfair and, for the most part, ruining the viewing experience based on the level of scrutiny which accompanies it.

Moving on, let's get a shot clock in high school basketball. I don't know what needs to happen for this to happen, or what the hang-ups are, but watching games decided based on stalling tactics and free throws is very 1985. Let the better team win, not the team that is the first to a six-point lead late in the third quarter.

Next, and this is outside the sports realm and something teenage Wade would've hated, but how about we get fast food out of our high school cafeterias? This is nothing more than a cash grab by our public institutions. How in the world can we spout-off about childhood health and obesity, then throw Taco Bell into the list of options at are places of education? Kids will eat s**t if you put s**t in front of them. I know because I was a kid who once happily ate my share of s**t. But if it's truly our job as adults to nurture those not yet ready to best decide for themselves, how about we do it?

Next, a legitimate resolution needs to be found to the obvious problem hovering above pay-for-play collegiate athletics. Recent legislation in California, along with NCAA amendments to rules regarding athletes' likeness, is simply further evidence of concessions opposed to legitimate solutions for an understandable problem. Like it or not, society has pushed this issue to the edge of the cliff, so rather than slowly climbing to the bottom, jump off already so we can begin rebuilding a fairly negotiated system from scratch.

Lastly, let's quit acting as if high-level professional athletes and celebrities are brilliant because they're now making a boatload of money off of the court, field, or TV or movie screen. Recognition of the financial benefits to your celebrity is not a sign of intelligence; it's more so just evidence of ambition and the savvy necessary to put smart people around you and listen to them.

I'm not knocking those who are cashing in. In fact, more power to them, after all, they are setting a great example for those coming behind them, as to fiscal responsibility. But making money on your money isn't reinventing the wheel, it's just making the most of a great opportunity.

And for me, I'm just going to continue on my everlasting quest to be better, which means more patience, more understanding, and being less critical of myself and others as a result.

Wish me luck.

Happy New Year! Here's to a fitter, healthier, and better read 2020 and more if I get my way.

You count on us to stay informed and we depend on you to fund our efforts.Quality local journalism takes time and money. Please support us to protect the future of community journalism.

View post:
Evanson column: A few resolutions for the sports world - and beyond - for 2020 - Pamplin Media Group

For health, environmental, and personal reasons, millions of Americans and even some fast-food burger connoisseurs are encouraged by the growth and increasing sophistication of the beef substitutes industry. But will old-school government pushback and a Bootleggers and Baptist-style pro-regulation coalition stall the growth of meat substitutes?

First, lets back up a bit and review the history of consumer regulation.

There was a time back in the 1970s when legislators let little escape their regulating pens, as they were so wholly dedicated in their effort to regulate away every real and imagined imperfection in human behavior. The Consumer Product Safety Commission, for example, wanted to outlaw one wooden Hickory Dickory Dock toy because when a child struck a mallet against it (as designed), it made too much noise.

In another egregious example of overreach, the Federal Trade Commission worried that consumers were just not smart enough to go without federal guidance when laundering and bleaching clothes. The agency issued rules requiring that labels filled with detailed instructions be attached permanently to garments and even to carpets and rugs. It went so far as to provide a glossary of words that could be used.

So, too, there were regulatory forays involving over-the-counter medicines that outlawed the use of such phrases as cures the common cold. After all, everyone knew there is no cure for a cold, even though self-medication can provide some relief. The regulators reasoned that anyone unwittingly buying such advertised products would be misled, evidently thinking Americans are too stupid to figure this out for themselves.

Indeed, the FTC became so fired up in its effort to give detailed consumer guidance that even the Washington Post called it the National Nanny and asked for some regulatory relief in a 1979 editorial.

During these regulatory heydays, I spent some time at the FTC. I learned that those who have the power to regulate also have the power to choose winners and losers. People in the policymaking playpen realized that regulation could be used strategically to expand markets or to raise costs for the rivals of politically influential businesses.

It was during this same period that, inspired by what I was observing, I developed my Bootlegger-Baptist theory for explaining the rise of regulation.

It was named after a dynamic, which can occur with local liquor laws, and it goes like this: Successful federal regulation frequently requires that two quite different interest groups work to support the same regulation. Bootleggers, are black-market business interests, which support prohibition due to the financial gain that comes from undermining their competition. Meanwhile, Baptists take the moral ground. Maybe they hope to make the world a better place for uninformed consumers. They also provide some validation for politicians and regulators.

As a case in point, consider again the FTC laundry-labeling juggernaut. The agency decided that some items of clothing should not be subjected to home laundering and wanted the associated label to say Professionally Launder Only. Producers of self-service, coin-operated, dry-cleaning equipment located in laundromats let out a howl. Meanwhile, the professional laundry industry was smiling.

The same thing happened when the agency determined that some fabric should be labeled, Do Not Bleach. Producers of safe bleach that can be used on sensitive fabrics were not happy. Even though that was then and this is now, there are some indications that the Washington nanny state is ready to strike again.

In December, Sen. Deb Fischer who just so happens to be a long-time member of the cattle industry introduced the so-called Real Meat Act. The Nebraska Republicans bill targets the rapidly-growing market for plant-based beef substitutes, products such as the Impossible Burger, which mimic meats appearance and taste. The legislation would codify a definition for beef and require that the words IMITATION MEAT be placed on product labels.

Noting her concern for consumers, and perhaps hoping to take some moral high ground, the senator said, I think we're seeing a number of fake food fads that are going on and we want to make sure that consumers know what they're buying. When you look at a lot of the plant-based meals that are being put out there, they're trying to piggyback on really, really good nutritious, safe beef. National Cattlemens Association President Jennifer Houston agreed, indicating that the industry merely wants a level playing field. (Shocker.)

Meanwhile, Jessica Almy of the Good Food Institute, which represents producers of plant-based food, indicates that no consumer complaints have been registered. She suggests that the whole effort is about protecting the conventional meat industry, not consumers.

Whats the lesson for 2020? Even at a time when the Trump administration is working almost feverishly to cut back existing rules while stifling new ones, certain regulations have powerful appeal and ready-made coalitions ready to turn them into reality. Could it be that officials on one side of Washington are pruning away rules while legislators on Capitol Hill are calling for more?

It wouldnt be the first time, nor will it be the last.

Bruce Yandle is a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog. He is a distinguished adjunct fellow with the Mercatus Center at George Mason University and dean emeritus of the Clemson University College of Business & Behavioral Science. He developed the "Bootleggers and Baptists" political model.

Go here to read the rest:
Nanny state comes for the Impossible Burger and other meat substitutes - Washington Examiner

We can see them, but all they know about each other is what they choose to share on social media. (Photo: Netflix)

The age of the social experiment on reality TV has hit a rough patch. Stalwarts of the genre like Survivor and Big Brother have become wildly inconsistent. The former throws too many twists into the mix, while the latter leans heavily on casting archetypes. The competition shows, which once promised real glimpses of human behavior, have become more interested in the game.

And even when those shows do get into social experiments these days, they usually butcher them so badly that you want them to stop. Survivor's recent failure in dealing with unwanted sexual advances dismayed and depressed fans, while pervasive racist and sexist behavior cast a pall over Big Brother 21, culminating in a fascinatingly dismal crowning for winner Jackson Michie. Point being: Whether they're actually trying to be social experiments or not, these shows are no longer suited to exploring human behavior in a reality TV context.

Instead, that mantle has been taken up by The Circle, Netflix's American adaptation of a UK format that beginson New Year's Day. The series, which will drop four episodes a week for three weeks, is like Big Brother in that it features players living in a building together. Where it differs, however, is that they never interact in person. Instead, the eight players (which, in a Love Island-esque fashion, are replaced by other players as the game goes along) interact solely through a social media network, called "The Circle."

Isolated in separate apartments and given multiple TV screens that are connected to The Circle, players must participate in social games, write profiles, upload photos, and chat with their fellow players. At the end of each cycle of gameplay, one player is Blocked, meaning they're eliminated and out of the game. If the idea of watching people talk to screens all day sounds boring to you, trust me, I thought the same until I found myself bingeing every episode of the series via screener in one day. It's an addictive gem of a show, one that really functions as a social game first and foremost.

Like Big Brother and Survivor, the ultimate purpose of the game is to reach the end. That means being well-liked enough to stay atop the social rankings players must rank all their fellow house guests every round but not so socially threatening that you become a target. Having to do this solely over text-based chat means saying all the right things, keeping in touch with everyone regularly, and staying apprised of who does and doesn't like who. The social games are fun, and do sometimes come with rewards, but there's nothing game-changing involved players live or die by their social strategy.

There's an extra wrinkle, though: Some players choose to play as catfish, misrepresenting their identities on The Circle. So there's a natural paranoia that permeates the game: Who is who they say they are, and who's lying to get ahead? It's a fear that feels all too real in the time of Instagram stalking and making friends on Twitter and Facebook. Moreover, it's a twist that would never work on Big Brother, utilizing The Circle's specific format to up the stakes.

What's most appealing about The Circleis the relatability, the idea that all of us are playing a version of this game in our daily lives. Unlike its predecessors, The Circle is the perfect reality competition show for this moment, with a remarkably savvy understanding of how social interactions work in 2019. Not every aspect of the show clicks there's some clunky pacing, especially in the first few episodes but once you plug into this network, you'll be addicted before you know it.

People are talking about The Circle in our forums. Join the conversation.

Kevin O'Keeffe is a writer, host, and RuPaul's Drag Race herstorian living in Los Angeles. Follow his musings and rantings on Twitter@kevinpokeeffe.

Read more from the original source:
The Circle is the Perfect Show for This Moment in Time - PRIMETIMER