I’m a reader, and expected to buy a Kindle (or another ebook reader) in the next year or two. I was just waiting for the next generation — more features, better design. I was also waiting for the price to come down. For such a non-versatile product, it wasn’t worth the several hundred dollars asking price.

When the iPad came out, I wasn’t sold on the theory that it could replace the Kindle. I mean, all that research and development into the E Ink technology, it can’t be so easily toppled by Apple’s version of a tablet computer, which has been out for years. Eye strain and all that hoopla had to stand for something, right?

Turns out, Amazon was too smart for its pants. E Ink isn’t dead, but was completely unnecessary for the mass market. With the iPad’s introduction, it can only survive in a niche market.

There are three advantages that a stand alone ebook reader offers over the iPad:

  • 1. Free 3G
  • 2. Weight
  • 3. Battery Life
  • 4. E Ink

Free 3G

Ok, it’s really great that there’s free 3G, and the last thing customers want is to pay yet another fee to AT&T for not-so-great 3G coverage. But turns out that it’s not that big a deal. Wireless is fine. And with the iPad’s easy one-month at a time subscription, impulsive shoppers will pay the fee. More resourceful users will buy the ebooks when they’re in range of a wireless connection.

Weight

The iPad is a little heavy for its size. Holding it up without support for a long period of time is difficult and not recommended. However, it’s no heavier than a hard cover book, and readers have found ways to read those.

Battery Life

Weeks of battery life versus 6-8 hours is a big difference, except who’s not around a charger these days within a few hours?

E Ink

While eye strain is not an issue E Ink can claim over the iPad, glare is. It’s definitely difficult to read on the iPad when you’re outside in bright sunlight.

Mass vs. Niche

The advantages prevent the ebook readers from becoming obsolete, but the iPad has relegated them to a niche market. They’re only useful for people who travel to remote areas with no electricity, and those who often read outdoors. Some may even find the weight a valuable feature. But even for these consumers, to really survive, the price needs to come way down.

For the rest of us, the iPad is the only thing that makes sense. While still pricey, for those in the market for an e-reader, there’s no reason not to get the iPad instead. Not only is it multiple e-readers in one (buy a book on BN or Amazon or anywhere else in PDF form and there’s an app to read it), it also has access to internet browsing, email, and all the apps in the world.

After having the iPad for just 2 weeks, I can say that I do indeed love my iPad, and am extremely happy that I never bought the Kindle or the iPhone.

{ 0 comments }

Eat to Starve Cancer: A 20 Minute Explanation

by Lynn Truong on May 18, 2010

Here’s an excellent video from TED with William Li explaining how food fights cancer. For anyone who wants to understand, this 20 minute video is the best place to start. Then, go eat some fruits and vegetables.

{ 0 comments }

A Quest for Health: Becoming Chemical Free

Post image for A Quest for Health: Becoming Chemical Free

by Lynn Truong on May 16, 2010

I’ve been on a quest to remove as many chemicals from my body as possible — without completely turning my lifestyle upside down. We are so dependent on modern conveniences, that health risks are unavoidable. I can’t stop using a cell phone, but I can use a headset instead of keeping the phone next to my head.

So for the past few years, I’ve focused on food — eat less meat, watch out for fruits and vegetables high in pesticides, drink tea, take fish oil supplements, and maintain healthy eating habits.

Then my husband asked me to buy him a glass food container for his daily lunch. (He had been using plastic ones for years.) Even though the plastic ones we have don’t have BPA, he was still worried about all the other chemicals that are leaching into the food through the frig, microwave, and freezer. BPA was labeled safe for food. Now it’s not. As long as plastic is leaching into our food, it’s not safe for food.

So began a mission to remove plastic from our food. First was the obvious glass food containers. I picked one up at Bed Bath & Beyond for $10.99 (with 20% coupon). Pretty darn pricey. So looking online we found this set for a reasonable price. I learned the hard way that when they say “18 pieces” it means 9 containers and 9 lids. But good thing I found this exact set at Costco for $30!

My Mr. Coffee coffeemaker was the next problem. Hot water traveling through plastic every day…I guess I needed to find an alternative. It’s hard. No normal coffeemaker is plastic free. I had to go old-school and get this stovetop vacuum siphon coffeemaker. Seriously. It hasn’t arrived yet. I’ll let you know how the coffee is.

Sure, I could have gone with the French Press but I’m just not a fan. The coffee is thick, it’s got sludge at the bottom, and oftentimes the coffee grinds float up and get into the drink.

After I got the coffeemaker, I realized that I had another problem: straws. I drink my coffee with a straw. I learned this from my sister-in-law who suggested it prevented teeth stains. So not only am I using this plastic drinking vessel daily, but it’s for hot liquid. Not good. There aren’t a lot of options. There are straws made from corn, bamboo, stainless steel, and glass. Glass was my least favorite option, but turned out to be the best option. Corn is not a good, sustainable material. Bamboo is just weird, and I thought would be hard to clean (or know whether it was clean). Reviewers complained about tasting metal through the stainless steel ones. Glass, material wise, is really the no-brainer. Of course, the worst case scenario of drinking broken glass is pretty horrifying. However, Glass Dharma’s got a great reputation and lifetime guarantee!

I thought I was done. I moved on to buying things for our upcoming White Water Rafting overnight trip. When I realized I needed to get sunblock, I almost picked up Coppertone because Costco had a coupon for it. Fortunately, I decided to do a little digging around on the best sunscreen ingredients. That started another long research project to get all my skin care products clean.

The ingredients in most common sunscreens are absolutely terrible for you. While effective at blocking UVA and UVB rays, they are toxins to your body. The only sunblock you should use is a physical sunblock, namely Zinc Oxide and Titanium Oxide. Nothing else. (There is some debate on whether nano-sized Zinc/Titanium Oxide is okay for you. The concern is that it can pass through your skin, but so far research has shown that the nano particles don’t get through. At this point, the factor is how much you can’t stand the white-ish coloring that Zinc will inevitably leave on your skin.) Some common sunscreens do have those two ingredients, but they are also loaded with the chemical sunscreens that you should never put on your skin again. The EWP has a sunscreen guide that was really helpful.

Without going into even more detail about this saga, I’ll just list the products that, after going through much, much research, I settled on. I’ve either purchased them, or have them as my “to try next” options. To pick these products, I didn’t just look them up on the Cosmetics Database for its “Hazard Score,” but I checked which ingredients is problematic, and also looked up reviews, because if I wasn’t going to like the texture or smell, I won’t use it, and it’d just be a big waste of money. Look up the score for the products in your cabinets. I was very surprised and then disturbed to discover that many of the popular “natural” products have terrible ingredients, too.

Sunblock

Badger Sunscreen SPF30 (water resistant, organic)

Living Naturals Organic SPF30 (water resistant, organic, vegan)

Moisturizer

SanRe Supple Sunshine (organic, SPF30)

SanRe Siesta Sunset (organic)

Pomega5 Green Tea Mattifying Moisturizer (0 hazard score)

100% Pure Organic Pomegranate Antioxidant Hydration (vegan, SPF20)

100% Pure Organic Acai Berry Antioxidant Facial Cream (vegetarian)

Face Wash

Gi’ovane Italy Organic Foam Cleanser (award winning)

Body Wash

Body Organic Pomegranate Love Body Wash (organic)

100% Pure Organic Tahiti Foaming Shower Gel (vegetarian)

Body Lotion

Body Organic Creamy Coconut Body Mist (organic)

*Hugo Naturals Unscented All-Over Lotion (organic, vegan)

100% Pure Organic Pomegranate Nourishing Body Cream (vegetarian)

Hair

Hugo Naturals Red Tea & Ylang Ylang Shampoo (organic, vegan)

Foundation

100% Pure Healthy Skin Foundation with Super Fruits SPF20

*Has vitamin A

Additional notes: Pregnant women should stay away from products containing vitamin A (and its derivatives like retinyl palmitate and retinol), products with soy (usually listed as lecithin, Phosphatidylcholine), as well as bergamot oil.

Vitamin A has been shown to cause birth defects (although it is only known that overconsumption of vitamin A taken orally causes the problem, it is not clear whether topically applied vitamin A causes the same problem, although studies do confirm that topically applied vitamin A does go into the bloodstream.) Soy products and bergamot oil have been implicated in worsening melasma during pregnancy.

Babycenter has a list of ingredients pregnant women should avoid. This is important because we use skin care products so regularly — many women wouldn’t even think twice about needing to change it during their pregnancy.

{ 0 comments }

3 People You Need for a Startup

Post image for 3 People You Need for a Startup

by Lynn Truong on April 12, 2010

To get a startup off the ground, you’ll need three types of people. Now, it’s also possible that one person will have two or all of these traits. These people are rare gems, and they’re definitely out there. But for the rest of us, we’ll need help. If you have the next big idea and are trying to assemble your team of founders, these are the three people you must get.

Business Man

No matter how good your idea is, if you want to make money from it, you’ll need someone with a nose for business. Some may think the business man can come later (via angel investors or hiring a CEO when the startup is off the ground). But the value this person brings is to see the long term cost of your decisions today. The earlier you have this person, the less it will cost in the future (and I would argue at a big cost to your future). Essentially, a good business man will be able to bridge the gap between today’s limitations and tomorrow’s potential. Additionally, this person will insist on benchmarks and goals, projections and plans to keep your eyes on the ball. It’s easy to drift into la la land as entrepreneurs, trying to bring your passions and dreams into reality. The business man keeps you grounded to ensure realistic success, rather than pursuing fantasy.

Tech Guy

There’s no way around technology anymore. Customers will demand it. And it mostly comes at such a low monetary cost that there’s no excuse not to have it. You might be able to get away with hiring out and paying for packaged services, but there’s nothing like having a tech guy available 24/7 for tweaks, debugging, and consultation without having to worry about the number of hours you can afford. A low-tech tech guy is minimal. But a good tech guy will get you leaps and bounds more advantage. Convenience, customization, security, and information are high commodities and users are willing to pay for it. If you can’t offer these things, you have instantly created a limit on your reach. The time when businesses with no technology will be obsolete is fast approaching, and shortly after will be the ones with little technology. Keep up.

People Person

Networking has always been important, but it is now a completely different animal. Networking no longer means mixers and golfing with the boss. Today we need branding, social media presence, and the landscape for marketing has changed. This person needs to be willing to go door-to-door, but know ahead of time which door to knock on. This person needs to lead a tribe, not of fans and followers, but of other tribe leaders who will bring their own fans and followers. With limited time and resources, this person doesn’t just network, he creates networks. He doesn’t just make friends, he makes connections. And he doesn’t just make a sale, he makes an evangelist.

It’s both harder and easier than ever to start your own business. The costs are low but so are the odds of success. More and more of us are taking the leap to create something we can call our own. I don’t think when we founded Killer Aces Media, we had all these things in mind. But we knew we each represented strengths and weaknesses that the others didn’t have. And while we all have overlapping traits in the above areas, I think we each stand strong in one particular area, none more important than the other, and each supporting the other in balance.

As we enter into the next phase of our little company, I let out a sigh of relief, gratitude, hope, and anxiety. We’ve broken even. We’ve gotten “off the ground.” Now, we build. Now, we grow. Now, we see how far we can go.

{ 0 comments }

Chinese New Year: Cash, Charity, and Community

Post image for Chinese New Year: Cash, Charity, and Community

by Lynn Truong on February 8, 2010

This year, Chinese New Year is on February 14, and it will be my first Chinese New Year as a married woman. That means I will be handing out red envelopes to my unmarried relatives. And for anyone who doesn’t know, these red envelopes contain cash.

There’s actually a lot of form to this tradition, but I don’t really know the rules. And some rules I know, but I don’t understand. For example, in addition to giving cash to unmarried relatives, my husband and I need to give red envelopes to our elders, even though they’re married. This includes our parents. Additionally, it’s not just relatives that should receive red envelopes. It’s freely offered to people we regularly meet — from postal workers to employees. Of course, the amount that is given in these situations is much less than to close relatives.

There’s a lot of cash exchange that occur in Chinese families. I call it the “circle of cash.” It’s a fundamental part of Chinese culture. We give out a lot of cash — on birthdays, weddings, and funerals. We expect that it will come back to us in some form or another. For example, before I was married, I received red envelopes from aunts, uncles, and married cousins.  And now that I’m married, I’ll be giving red envelopes to the children of these people who gave to me when I was younger. It’s not a direct exchange, but it’s the same thing.

In this way, cash builds community among the family. On Chinese New Year, it represents a wish for prosperity. For weddings, it’s etiquette to bring enough to cover the cost of your meal, in addition to the gift portion. For funerals, it’s to help the family pay for expenses. Cash is offered both in celebration and for charity. Even though I’m no longer on the receiving end, I’m very happy to be a part of this tradition.

Happy Chinese New Year!

{ 0 comments }

Cancer Is Preventable

Post image for Cancer Is Preventable

by Lynn Truong on February 2, 2010

I just finished reading Anticancer, A New Way Of Life by David Servan-Schreiber. Everyone should read this book.

We’ve known for years now that certain foods have anticancer benefits. Fruits and veggies, packed with vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants are very, very good for you. Omega-3, lycopene, polyphenols, and resveratrol are household names. We now understand that foods don’t just break down to protein and carbs, fiber and vitamins, and that the soil our foods are grown dramatically affect the nutrients that result in the food it produces. And slowly, we are seeing how what we feed animals affect the composition of the meat we end up eating. Duh.

I’ve written about the cost of meat before. Not only are factory farming practices cruel, they have atrocious effects on our environment. And beyond the well known facts that factory farming is the direct cause of the rise of E. Coli poisoning around the world, and the use of antibiotics and hormones have contributed to the rise of superbugs and the alarming change in sexual health in both humans and aquatic life, it can be argued that it is carcinogenic — not meat eating, but factory farming itself.

Factory farmed meat causes cancer.

Fruits, vegetables, herbs, and spices prevent and fight cancer.

I don’t want to put all the weight on just one book. I’ve been reading about this for years (see below for a list of additional resources). One of the most eye opening was The China Study by T. Colin Campbell. He found a link between meat eating and cancer.

My husband is skeptical when I tell him this. He wonders why, information that is so impactful, is not more well known. This is addressed very well in Anticancer, and briefly in The China Study.

It’s not that the meat and dairy industry, pharmaceuticals, politicians, and all the other people involved, want people to get cancer and die from it. But their actions, driven by reasonable motivations, effectively do the same thing.

It’s just business

Factory farming, pesticides, processed foods, preservatives, and pills are big businesses. Not only that, it represents the modern way of life. It’s not just that these large companies that manufacture (alleged) carcinogens have overwhelming pressure to not acknowledge the dangers, but the population in general doesn’t want to change. As long as these claims are just “studies” and “links,” there’s no reason to upend everything. Of course, if people knew that eating corn-fed cows caused cancer, they’d stop eating it (at least, many would, after all, there’s still plenty of people smoking). But as long as it’s possible to be skeptical, nothing has to change.

There is proof

There have been extensive studies done, around the world, that shows very clearly the direct link between food and cancer. In Anticancer, David Servan-Schreiber explains why the medical community haven’t embraced this idea. It’s not so hard to recommend more fruits and vegetables to patients, but doctors still don’t believe it.

1. Evidence-based medicine

In medical culture, changes in recommendations given to patients are allowable in only one case and one alone: when there has been a series of “double-blind” studies demonstrating the effectiveness of a treatment in humans. This is called, legitimately, “evidence-based medicine.”

Compared to these experimental studies with humans, epidemiology is looked on merely as a source of hypotheses. At the same time, to an oncologist who spends his days in contact with patients, studies carried out in laboratories on cancer cells or on mice are not taken into consideration either. Until they have been confirmed by large-scale studies in humans, they do not constitute “evidence.”

The validation of an anticancer drug up through the stage of adequate experimentation on humans costs between five hundred million and a billion dollars. This kind of investment seems justified when one considers that even a relatively minor anticancer medicine such as Taxol brings in a billion dollars a year to the company that holds the patent. On the other hand, it is not financially feasible to invest such sums in demonstrating the usefulness of broccoli, raspberries, or green tea, because they can’t be patented and their scale will never cover the cost of the original investment. Even when they exist, human studies of anticancer benefits of food will simply never match the caliber of those for drugs.

2. Drug fix

Nutrition is barely taught in medical schools…If there’s a problem, there’s a drug. Even in the case of cardiologists, who willingly acknowledge that the risk of cardiac disease can be lowered by changing one’s eating habits, our medical culture encourages us to neglect that approach and prefer a pharmaceutical solution.

Our bodies can fight cancer

The premise of Anticancer is this: “All of us have cancer cells in our bodies. But not all of us will develop cancer.”

There is a very good explanation in the book on the process of cancerous tumors. The bottom line is that inflammation gives cancer cells the perfect environment to grow. Inflammation brings a bunch of white blood cells that are then infected by cancer cells to help them. Additionally, cancer cells are able to create new blood vessels in order to get nutrients to the cells. Lastly, cancer cells are hard to fight because they don’t die. Regular cells commit suicide after their time is done. Cancer cells don’t.

So it goes to reason that there are several ways to attack cancer.

1. Prevent inflammation

2. Prevent the development of these new blood vessels

3. Find a way to kill cancer cells

It turns out that the right foods are able to do all three.

We can choose to help

We can either provide tools for our own bodies to fight cancer cells, or leave them weakened to promote cancer growth. These tools are simply food and environment.

It’s difficult to change our environment. We can do what we can to limit our exposure to chemicals. But we don’t live in a bubble. We are exposed to thousands of potentially harmful chemicals every day. At the very least, limit exposure to BPA (bisphenol A) in plastics, perchloroethylene/tetrachloroethylene in dry cleaning, deodorants and antiperspirants that contain aluminum, parabens and phthalates in cosmetics and perfumes, household pesticides and insecticides, and cooking in scratched Teflon pans. Additionally, avoid close contact with your cell phone — use speaker or headsets and don’t keep it in your pocket.

A note on cell phones: you’ve probably heard that there is no proof of harm from cell phones. These studies are based on participants who have used cell phones for less than 5 years. Studies done on people who have used cell phones for over 10 years have shown a risk for brain tumors. These people developed brain tumors on the side of the brain they used their cell phone on.

I think environmental factors are easier to understand for most people — we know that asbestos and tobacco cause cancer. We can process how these bad chemicals can get into our bodies and damage it.

What seems to be difficult for people to believe is that the food we eat can cause cancer (but more importantly, can also fight cancer). Maybe it’s because it’s always been put as a conventional versus organic argument, or meat versus no meat debate. Perhaps it is too large of a commitment to make, to pay more for organic or to stop eating meat. But it doesn’t have to be that dramatic.

Omega-6, white flour, and sugar increases inflammation. Corn-fed beef has a lot of Omega-6. Grass-fed beef has less, plus more Omega-3, which reduces inflammation. Green tea, turmeric (curry), tomatoes (cooked), olive oil (and generally, all fruits, vegetables, and clean meat) decrease inflammation, prevents the development of blood vessels, and kills cancer cells.

We eat 3 times a day (or more). Every day, at each meal, we choose what to eat. Is it possible to simply shift the portions that go onto our plates? Instead of a large slab of meat with two pieces of broccoli, could we cut the meat portion in half (and eat the other half tomorrow), put add a few different pieces of vegetables (broccoli, carrot, tomato)? Have fruit, dark chocolate, green tea, and olive oil often.Is that so hard to swallow?

Deciding between conventional and organic

Keep in mind that while some products aren’t labeled organic, it might still contain little to no pesticides compared to conventional. If you buy directly from farmers, ask them. It costs a lot of money to get the “organic” stamp. Some farmers might be using the same methods (or practically the same) but just don’t have the label.

Similarly, organic meat doesn’t mean the cows were grass-fed or the chickens are free-range. It meets some specific requirements like no antibiotics or hormones, no animal byproducts in their feed, etc. While that is great in terms of the environment and health of the animals, it does not necessarily mean the nutrient content of the meat is much better.

Depending on where you are, finding grass-fed beef, free-range chickens, and pastured pork can be difficult, and really cost prohibitive. But just think about eating a  little less meat. We eat way more protein than we need. Really, we eat more of everything than we need. Eat less meat, eat more fruits and vegetables. You don’t need to deny yourself the simple pleasure of a great piece of steak. Just eat in moderation. And eat a lot more fruits and vegetables.

Michael Pollan’s food rule boils down to seven words: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly Plants.

For fruits and vegetables, the most contaminated are apples, pears, peaches, nectarines, strawberries, cherries, raspberries, grapes, peppers, celery, green beans, potatoes, spinach, lettuce, cucumbers, squash, and pumpkin.

The least contaminated fruits and vegetables are bananas, oranges, tangerines, pineapple, grapefruit, melons, watermelons, plums, kiwi, blueberries, mangoes, papaya, broccoli, cauliflower, cabbage, mushrooms, asparagus, tomatoes, onions, eggplant, peas, radishes, and avocados.

As a nation, we spend less percentage of our income on food than any other in the world. But cheap, unsubstantial, and unhealthy food costs much more than cash. We pay for cheap food with our health. This seems to indicate that paying for healthy food ultimately costs us much less.

What if it really was that easy?

Additional Resources

These are books that have moved me to change my ways. If you don’t want to do so much reading, watch the documentary Food, Inc and follow the rules listed in Michael Pollan’s small, handy book, Food Rules.

{ 1 comment }

Will Good Writing Be A Lost Art?

Post image for Will Good Writing Be A Lost Art?

by Lynn Truong on January 28, 2010

I hire all the writers for our Killer Aces Media blogs. Writer applications are submitted every day. And every day I see awful writing samples. I think Castle would agree that I could use ironic correctly here.

I expect a certain amount of bad applications. When you post a job listing online, you’re just not going get all high quality candidates. But it shocks me to get applications from nurses, doctors, and “experienced” writers and editors who submit samples that don’t even have coherent sentences. It’s bad enough when their email isn’t checked for grammar and spelling. (I can understand how an email can get written and sent quickly with errors, although I would think a job application for a writing job would deserve a careful review.) When writing samples that were presumably carefully selected aren’t comprehensible, I am disheartened. These are candidates with plenty of education and work experience. I wonder if good writing is going to be a thing of the past.

When blogging became popular and mainstream, writing errors were easily forgiven by readers. Many times they’d even go unnoticed because internet users scan rather than read. But ultimately, these errors were more careless than ignorant. What I’m seeing now is simply a lack of grammar fundamentals. Basic punctuation is misused. Sentences are incomplete. Even following the “write like you talk” model of blogging, articles don’t make sense. I’m not sure whether I should lower my expectations or hope that a real writer will apply.

I wrote about my frustration with bad applications at Problogger. That list only helps get applications past the first step — I’ll actually read the writing samples. To actually get the job, applicants should really know some writing basics.

If you’re not sure, don’t use it.

Unless you are positive that you’re using the semi colon correctly, skip it. It’s pretty easy. Use a period instead.

Watch out for too much repetition.

I just read an article where the writer used “effectively” about ten times. It was even used twice in the same sentence. You don’t need to go crazy and use fancy, obscure words. Just watch out for words that you are using way too often. Rewrite the sentence or replace the word.

A sentence consists of a subject and a verb.

I understand that blog posts often break this rule with no great consequence. Sometimes a fragment makes a point better than a complete sentence would. But most of the time, this rule shouldn’t be broken.

Get to the point.

Blog posts are short (mostly). They have short paragraphs. They have lists. They have headings. This means that you need to get to the point. Online users are in a hurry — they’ve got a bunch of other blogs to read. So make sure that every sentence is necessary.

Is that so much to ask?

{ 1 comment }

(500) Days of Summer: Doesn’t Quite Deliver

Post image for (500) Days of Summer: Doesn’t Quite Deliver

by Lynn Truong on January 25, 2010

Just saw (500) Days of Summer after much hype from friends and critics. It’s been hailed as a “refreshing” take on love, pointedly referring to the more common romantic comedies with story lines ranging from cute to absurd, but all ending with happily ever after. While the main characters in this movie don’t end up together, it’s still a movie about love that’s wrapped up and delivered to the audience with a neatly tied bow, which we all know, and which the movie attempts to say, is not how love really works.

Boy meets girl. They hook up. They break up. They move on with other people. Ok, it’s not what movie goers expect to see in a movie with charming Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel who seem made for each other. But as far as telling a “different” kind of love story (one that is more realistic), it still does so in a haze of romantic notions and can’t help but offer a happily ever after. It’s like trying to describe a tragedy to a six year old. We try so hard to preserve innocence, but we don’t realize that sugar coating real life only raises the already impossible expectations of love.

In reality, love is messy, and pretty ugly. And even as it attempts to show that ugly side, (500) Days doesn’t really dare to completely go there.

There’s a scene where Joseph Gordon-Levitt is floating on cloud nine, hi-fiving strangers and dancing in the park. It’s a true and accurate depiction of being on a love high. But the scenes where he’s trying to portray the utter dismay of a love lost, do not go far enough. He in his robe buying liquor and twinkies is an affront at the true experience of breaking up with someone you never really understood. If only it were that easy.

Perhaps what I find the most offensive about the idea that this movie is any different than the long line of romantic comedies that are unrealistic and perpetuate a misconception of how love works, is the very generous closure that Zooey’s character offers. Summer waits for him at his favorite spot, to explain what happened — simply put as “I knew what I was never sure of with you.”

I’m not saying that I didn’t like this movie. I enjoyed it. But I enjoy most romantic comedies, and this is just another one. When critics say that it should be nominated as best picture in this year’s Academy Awards, I have to give an exasperated sigh. There’s nothing more original about this love story than other fun, witty, well-written romantic comedies before it. And there’s certainly nothing more realistic.

In real life, Summer would not have understood the emotional impact she had on Tom, and if she did, she would not confront it. In real life, Tom would not have had closure, would not have left his greeting card job, and would not have thought to ask Autumn out.  Sure, Tom would have slowly but surely moved on. He would always look back at his (500) days of Summer with longing, regret, and anger. And he would have eventually found Autumn, but not in the charming way portrayed in the movie. Summer would have eventually gotten married, very likely to the next person after Tom, but that would be the end. They’d never see or speak to each other again.

But can this reality really sell? We’re still in Hollywood, aren’t we? The audience demands closure, even if they can’t demand it in real life. This movie was still too afraid to stray too far from the formula it was trying to avoid.

{ 0 comments }

Make Managing Your Inbox A Priority

Post image for Make Managing Your Inbox A Priority

by Lynn Truong on January 22, 2010

I estimate that I get about 150 emails in my inbox per day. This doesn’t include the emails that are automatically filtered to folders I never see. For years, I struggled with getting my email under control. There would be hundreds of emails in my inbox at a time. I remember more than once having to sort through over 1000. Once every few weeks I’d need to set aside a few hours and force myself to get through them. Inevitably, there’d be an important email I missed or forgot about. Most of my replies often started with “Sorry for the delay in responding.”

The problem was never that I didn’t check my email. I checked. Constantly. Impulsively. But I’d read them or give a glance over the unread ones and never did anything about them. Then another ten would come in the next hour. But there’s a difference between checking email and managing email. Most of us make checking email a priority, but put managing it on the back burner. It’s easy to see why. Most emails are spam, promotion requests, and cc’ed conversations that aren’t relevant us. Still, I would argue that managing your inbox should be a high priority for any professional.

It is this dichotomy that messes us up. We make it important to check email, but not important to deal with it. We saw that email about needing a document from us, but we promptly forgot about it as it got lost in the sea of email in our inbox.

There are a lot of strategies to managing email. Some might work well for you and others won’t. But if you make managing email an important task to do every day, you’ll be very motivated to figure out the best strategy for you. For me, on my list of daily to-dos, is Inbox Zero. It’s been the most effective way to get me to go through my email. Whenever I look back at Toodledo and see the Inbox Zero task not checked off, I grudgingly go back to my email to clear my inbox. This doesn’t mean just pushing it off to a “pending” folder, either. If the email requests a response or an action I can do then and there (whether I feel like it or not, whether it’s urgent or not, whether it’s convenient or not), I do it. Because it’s not about whether that email requires an immediate response — it’s about clearing it out of your inbox. The only emails that get passed along to a to-do folder are ones that I simply cannot do right away.

Part of managing your email includes keeping on top of those “pending” folders, too. Look through your “waiting” and “to-do” folders every day. Follow up if it’s time, and do them if you can.

Responding to emails in a timely matter is very important in establishing your credibility and reliability. If you don’t, someone else will, and in this age of instant gratification and easy connectivity, no one is going to wait for you to get a handle on your email. They’ll simply go to someone else who can.

{ 3 comments }

Pimping Wise Bread On KPCC

Post image for Pimping Wise Bread On KPCC

by Lynn Truong on January 21, 2010

Yesterday I was listening to Patt Morrison on KPCC. She was talking to Chris Farrell, who wrote The New Frugality: How to Consume Less, Save More, and Live Better. It suddenly occurred to me that I should call in and try to get in a Wise Bread mention.

I’ve called KPCC one other time before. I was put on hold and never selected to go on air. I kind of knew what to expect on that front. You get vetted by a screener who (I think) leaves notes for the host to decide which caller to choose. Also, being a long time listener to KPCC, I frequently hear unprepared and startled callers when they are picked to go on air. So I tried not to zone out while on hold and typed up some notes to make sure I didn’t freeze and ramble on air.

I had barely heard Patt say “…from Baldwin Park” when I jumped in and started talking. I didn’t hear Chris say “sure” when I said “Wise Bread” and didn’t hear Patt say “thank you, Lynn.” It all happened so fast, I wasn’t thoroughly convinced I was actually on air until I listened to the program again.

Update: I reached out to Chris after the show and he graciously allowed me to interview him for Wise Bread.

{ 0 comments }