My fitness regime just got a whole lot easier to manage. Or at least that's the promise implicit in Philips' DirectLife program. The idea seems simple enough: Carry around a small piece of plastic every day for the next 12 weeks, and Philips will show me how many calories I burned doing everything from walking down the street to cleaning my apartment to running 3 miles. The more I know, the more encouraged I'll be to keep moving, the more likely I'll continue to build the habits of a healthy, active lifestyle. Sign me up! It costs $99 to start, plus $10/month for access to the Web site and coaching after the initial 12-week program ends.
The Device Philips clearly takes its design cues from Apple (who doesn't these days?). The gadget is lightweight and unfussy, with only a series of dots that light up each time you knock off 15% of your preset goal. The software is a cinch to install, and I set up a profile in about 10 minutes, entering my height, weight, age, and goals I wanted to achieve. After a few hours to charge the device, the gadget is live in my pocket for an eight-day assessment period.
My Take This device turns me into one of those Tamagotchi toys that were popular in the 1990s! I'm all about the green dots. Seeing them light up is like getting a virtual pat on the back.
The Plan An assessment period measures how many calories I burn per day. Then DirectLife uses that data to come up with a plan to improve that number during the course of 12 weeks. By syncing up the device to the computer, I can monitor my progress as often as I'd like, and compare my progress to others in the program.
During the assessment period, I go about my regular, when-I-have-nothing-going-on fitness routine, which consists of running every other day and walking to the subway. As I wear the device, I imagine that it's tracking my every move, quickly crunching the data that will deem me a fit, active member of society. Eight days later, I am shocked. My profile, it turns out, is similar to "David," a thirty-something computer programmer who drives to work every day and watches a lot of television. First off, for all the customization Philips promises with this device, why not give me a woman for my profile type? Second, and this one's important, since when did running 3 miles three days a week become not a big deal?
Looking further into the data, Philips DirectLife tells me I burn an average of 645 calories a day per week, and this figure puts me in the "less active" end of its fitness spectrum, the lowest category. This seems odd since the AARP says a 150-pound administrative assistant burns roughly 800 calories during an eight-hour day. What about the basal metabolic rate, which calculates the number of calories your body burns without physical exercise, after factoring in your height, weight, gender, and age? Mine, according to this site, is 1,323 calories a day. Even if I stayed in bed all day, I would still burn more calories than Philips' number.
Clearly, Philips has its own equation for counting calories burned. And that brings me back to its definition of "less active," which Philips has illustrated with an icon of a human silhouette sitting down. So, according to Philips, I'm not even bipedal. The next level up is healthy, followed by fit, active, and sporty. The graph labels 1,057 calories burned under fit. Jeez. By that logic, if I want to be considered sporty, I have to be this guy. In a past interview, he said he ran an average of 120 miles a week, consuming about 5,000 to 8,000 calories a day to do so. For runners, a good rule of thumb is that you burn 100 calories for every mile run. If Jurek ran 17 miles a day, he'd burn 1,700 calories; add that number to the estimated 1,841 calories the 6-foot-2-inch, 165-pound ultramarathoner burned at rest back in 2002, when he was 28, and well, the takeaway is that most of us are leagues away from Philips' fitness apex of "sporty."
My Take There's something not quite right about my "less active" assessment.
The Goal Philips says my goal should be to burn 823 calories a day over a 12-week period. Doesn't sound too hard. Except, around the same time, I land new assignments at work, which mean longer hours tethered to my desk. (To wit: On the day the Philips rep visits Fast Company to explain how all of this works, I can't attend the presentation because I'm under deadline. Noah, my online editor, fills me in later: it's an accelerometer that uses algorithms. Which clarifies nothing. He might as well have said dark magic.) By week two, my running days dwindle to twice a week. When I do go, I'm lighting up eight dots out of nine, which is more than 100%. On the off days, I average about 30% to 40% calories burned.
I sync my device every few days and can see how other colleagues do, the idea being I should use their progress to spur my own. Not really interested. But there is someone in my group, Lindsay, whom I don't recognize. On October 11, she clocked in 586% for calories burned. For real? How is that possible? What is she doing?
Perhaps I am not trying hard enough. I email my fitness coach, Jen, asking for ways to burn more calories on the days I don't go running. Also, is there such a thing as rollover calories?
Jen answers me back two days later. The extra calories burned do get figured into the weekly average, so it's not wasted. (Yay!) Then she suggests small changes to "break up my sitting time" at work, including "making several trips to the printer instead of saving it for one trip" (ridiculous, since the printer is about 10 feet away from my desk) and taking a "20-minute walk at lunch" (just plain impractical most days). But her larger point is not lost. On one day, I can't fit in a run, but I resolve to walk from my apartment to a restaurant, about 2 miles, to meet a friend for dinner (it earns me two dots). On the weekends, I make it a point to walk to where I need to go. The gains are small but encouraging: Last night, at the gym, I weigh myself and find I have lost 2 pounds since this whole experiment started. Which inspires another small change: For my daily commute, I should start using the subway station that's 10 blocks away instead of the one that's only 2 blocks away.
My Take I still don't fully understand how the device works, but it's hard to argue with those 2 pounds.
The Follow-through Three weeks later, the green dots continue to bring small thrills of accomplishment. The data stopped being sexy by about week two. Also, I can't shake this feeling that I'm being cheated when it comes to counting calories burned. Upon Noah and Kate's suggestion, I switch the setting from necklace to pocket, with the hope of a more accurate reading.
My Take I'm skeptical that the novelty will last, but I'm still on board. How much of a difference will switching the setting from necklace to pocket make?
Today, the Federal Trade Commission responded to an "open letter" from online advertisers that asked for the commission's newly updated guidelines to be scrapped because they purportedly "muzzle social media" and, thus, inhibit the freeflow of ideas.
"Although the [Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB)] contends the FTC's Endorsement Guides are unconstitutional, the Guides apply only to marketing and they attempt to illustrate some of the factors relevant to distinguishing advertising from editorial content," says Mary Engle, the FTC's director of the division of advertising practices, in an email statement released today. "If particular communications do not in fact constitute advertising, as the IAB appears to be suggesting, then the Guides do not apply. Where the message is advertising, however, disseminators have an obligation to ensure it is not misleading. This includes, when it is not otherwise clear from the context, identifying when the endorser has been paid for the endorsement. Although IAB may disagree with the policy, nothing in this approach is unconstitutional," Engle re-iterated.
The request for the FTC retraction, written by Randall Rothenberg, president and CEO of the Interactive Advertising Bureau, a group that represents more than 375 media and tech companies including AOL, Google, MSN, and The New York Times Digital, also called for the commission to begin anew with "a fair and open process," this time with more input from bloggers and other social media professionals. Read the full letter here.
In submitting the letter, the IAB joins the chorus of bloggers and pundits arguing that the new guidelines punish new media. "One of the extremely real effects of these rules is to dry up a flow of opportunity to solo media entrepreneurs without touching offline media professionals," says Rothenberg.
He points to the oft-cited book review example, in which books received by bloggers are considered a form of compensation and as a result would have to be disclosed. "By saying, 'Don't worry, bloggers, we're going after publishers,' it's saying it's okay to send those books to magazines and newspapers but not to a blog or a social media site or someone who's known to review on Amazon. It's saying if publishers send these books to someone who reviews things for Amazon.com, the publisher can be penalized. But if you send them to The New York Times or The Atlantic or freelancers who does contributing to Publishers Weekly, you do not face the threat of penalty."
The IAB's letter was released a day after the FTC made itself available to media for questions on its revised guidelines. During the session, the FTC's Engle reportedly stressed that the commission would not be going after bloggers but instead would focus on advertisers. The statement echoed assistant director of the division of advertising practices Richard Cleland's comments in an article published by Fast Company, on October 7. In that article, Cleland denied the reported $11,000 fine for bloggers and clarified, "Our approach is going to be educational, particularly focusing on advertisers: What kind of education are you providing them, are you monitoring the bloggers and whether what they're saying is true?"
"The document is laying out a regulatory structure that has penalties attached to it, and it has investigative procedures attached to it," says Rothenberg. "If the FTC's intent is only to educate, the document should have been written to reflect that."
Instead of FTC intervention, the IAB argues, new media as a sector should police themselves, much like traditional media does for newspapers and magazines. In a March 2, 2009, letter issued in response to the FTC's call for comments on its new guidelines, the IAB argued that "strong and effective self-regulatory programs already exist," citing the Word of Mouth Marketing Association's "Ethical Blogger Contact Guidelines" and the Direct Marketing Association's "Guidelines for Ethical Business Practice."
The FTC, who's clearly sticking to its guns, doesn't think that is enough.
Full disclosure: Randall Rothenberg freelanced for Fast Company in 2002.
Moments after the surprise announcement that Barack Obama had won the Nobel Peace Prize, the Web was atwitter with criticism and speculation about whether he's done anything to deserve it.
He helped diffused some of the quips by, himself, admitting that he may not be worthy. And he Tweeted one word: "Humbled." Here's another idea: Give away the $1.4 million in prize money to a do-gooder organization. Not a massive charity, but a small not-for-profit. Something related to creating peace and understanding in the Middle East and Asia, the work that earned him the Nobel. Below, the Fast Company staff offers five from-the-hip ideas of organizations that could use Obama's chunk of change to make a massive impact.
American Near East Refugee Aid (ANERA), Washington, D.C.
A nonpolitical, nonreligious not-for-profit, ANERA has been working solely in the Middle East for 40 years by providing a wide array of relief aid in impoverished communities across Lebanon, Jordan, the West Bank, and Gaza. One example: renovating preschools in Gaza using recycled materials from war-torn buildings.
Barefoot College, Tilonia, India For more than 30 years, the Barefoot College has been training the poorest of the poor to innovate their way out of poverty in rural areas of Africa, Afghanistan, and India. In 2006, with just $100,000, it trained 10 Afghan women and bought 120 solar units to power five villages in Afghanistan. Read more about it here.
Hidaya Foundation, Santa Clara, California
The organization implements educational, environmental, social welfare, and health care programs in economically depressed areas of Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, several countries in West Africa, and North America, focusing on projects that promote self-employment.
OneVoice Movement, Tel Aviv, Israel/Ramallah, West Bank, Palestine Via workshops, town-hall meetings, and college tours, OneVoice emphasizes tolerance and coexistance between Israelis and Palestinians--and trains young people to serve as leaders promoting nonviolence.
Seeds of Peace, New York, New York Founded in 1993 as a leadership-training-camp program with 46 Israeli, Palestinian, and Egyptian teenagers, this not-for-profit has produced more than 4,000 young leaders working for peace in the areas of international affairs, politics, business, medicine, nonprofit, and media.
Got an even better idea for a not-for-profit that deserves Obama's Nobel money? Post them in the comments section below.
Liz Claiborne is leaving its longtime partner, Macy's, for an exclusive partnership with J.C. Penney Co., the women's apparel company announced today.
The clothing line, like a lot of other labels in the sector, is struggling. The company cut about 8% of its workforce earlier this year. But to go from Macy's to Penney's? Is this J.C. Penney raising its profile or Liz moving down even deeper into the mass market?
Last year, staff writer Danielle Sacks covered Liz Claiborne's recruitment of Tim Gunn as its creative chief, to help revive the flagging behemoth. Read the story here.
As you've likely heard by now, the Federal Trade Commission is trying to reign in freebie-grabbing bloggers and graft-happy social media users masquerading as unbiased critics. The agency announced an update to the FTC Act of 1980, the requisite guidelines for consumer endorsements and testimonials. For many, the takeaway has been this: Bloggers Must Disclose Every Single Freebie Sent to Them From Companies--or Pay an $11,000 Fine. Scary.
Pundits quickly bashed the FTC as an old-economy regulator trying to legislate new-media technology. Few considered that the government may actually try to protect consumers from false advertising or bloggers on the take. It's "insanity and inanity. And danger," wrote blogger Jeff Jarvis. "The regulations raise no end of questions."
We asked a few other prominent bloggers what their biggest concerns were about the news, then we solicited responses to those concerns from Richard Cleland, assistant director, division of advertising practices at the FTC. (You can read the full report at ftc.gov.)
Heather B. Armstrong, author of parenting blog Dooce: "Eleven thousand dollars is a little crazy for a post. Maybe I'm being naïve, but I think a lot of people who are in violation [of not disclosing] just don't know that they're supposed to."
Richard Cleland: "That $11,000 fine is not true. Worst-case scenario, someone receives a warning, refuses to comply, followed by a serious product defect; we would institute a proceeding with a cease-and-desist order and mandate compliance with the law. To the extent that I have seen and heard, people are not objecting to the disclosure requirements but to the fear of penalty if they inadvertently make a mistake. That's the thing I don't think people need to be concerned about. There's no monetary penalty, in terms of the first violation, even in the worst case. Our approach is going to be educational, particularly with bloggers. We're focusing on the advertisers: What kind of education are you providing them, are you monitoring the bloggers and whether what they're saying is true?"
Brian Lam, editorial director of Gizmodo: "Some colleagues of mine just reminded me of how many freelance pro journalists take junkets. In the end, I'm glad these rules are being introduced, but it's kind of stupid to attach unethical behavior to a particular publishing medium. Look at how shitty TV journalism can be, by and large."
RC: "It's not the medium, it's the message. We want to establish a self-imposed ethical standard so people are aware of the conflicts of interest. That's the base, and we're saying: This is commerce. That's acceptable, but when that happens, the reader should know that there's this potential bias. Actually, these rules have applied to consumer endorsers since they were issued in 1980. I don't think the concept of 'disclose what I'm being paid' is a radical concept that is going to be foreign to people."
Amy Sherman, author of the food blog Cooking With Amy: "I'm more concerned that this will cause confusion among people and whether they can think they are free to say what they want. How is a blog different from word of mouth? Does it matter how big you are?"
RC: "When it comes to word of mouth and blogging, there's no difference. With word of mouth, there are instances when you're not necessarily hired by an agency but set up by a company. You get the inside info and get to be the first to have access, so you can earn bonus points for every person you tell--that is what I consider word of mouth. If you're paid to sell somebody's product in this way, and you deliver an endorsement, it doesn't matter in terms of how many people you send it to, but it does in terms of public interest and whether what the blogger has done is worth the inquiry. If you have 20 friends or 16,000, obviously, we'll look at the one with 16,000."
Ryan Block, founder of gadget blog GDGT: "There is a lot of vagueness and lack of definition to the guides."
RC: "There is some vagueness....The bloggers have to look at how they do their blogging, their business practice, and figure out the way that consumers will best get the message that this is a sponsored post. In terms of clear and conspicuous, the criteria there is that the consumers will notice the disclosure. Disclosures can be made in different ways, whether you make it outside of the text but in proximity to blog, or incorporate it into the blog discussion itself--those are the issues that bloggers will have discretion about."
That leaves one big question on everyone's mind: How is this going to be enforced?
RC: "I realize there are hundreds of thousands of bloggers out there. Enforcement on a case-by-case basis--that's not even a realistic approach. There are other types of enforcement, surfing the Internet, finding companies that are making significant health claims about products, identifying where problems exist. We'd alert Web sites to potential problems and then invite them to contact us about questions of compliance. I don't think it's a matter of the enforcement side being weak but the most cost-effective tool in our arsenal. In this case, we're going to rely more on voluntary compliance than prosecution. That's the most likely source that we'll be able to use to identify a problem, and if we do see a problem at a ground level and then ask the right questions, we'll figure out why there's a problem pretty quickly and go from there." Also, Cleland adds, "Competitors are very quick to turn people in. I've never suffered from a shortage of competitive complaints."
Got a question you want us to ask the FTC? We'll forward it to Richard Cleland directly. Send it to ideas@fastcompany.com.
Representative Rahm Emanuel of Illinois is expected to accept the job of White House chief of staff today, according to various news sources, and if he does so, he'll beat out others on a shortlist that included Senators Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) and Dick Lugar (R-Indiana).
Emanuel has been the lead front-runner for a while, and has yet to formally accept. Why so shy all of a sudden, Mr. Hard-Charging Inside Man? On MSNBC last night, Emanuel expressed concern about how the appointment would affect his family and his career. Somehow, though, I don't think the balancing act will be too much of a problem for the former staffer of the Clinton administration who went on to orchestrate the Democrats' House victory in 2006 and who has played a major fund-raising role in president-elect Barack Obama's historic campaign. To be sure, the chief of staff role is critically important for the president and requires challenging works hours for a family man with three kids.
Somehow, I'm not convinced that's the reason. Not that I'm giving short shrift to the idea of work-life balance. Everyone has trouble with it. What I do know is that Rahm Emanuel figured out the secret, which includes a surprising activity that had kept him on point since he was 16, and shared it with Fast Company back in 1999.
So quit playing coy, Rahm Emanuel, and just take the job already, if it's yours to take. There's important work to be done. Like helping Obama pick a new Treasury Secretary.
UPDATE: AT 1:00 EST TODAY, EMANUEL REPORTEDLY ACCEPTED THE POST OF CHIEF OF STAFF.
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan denied that he was somehow responsible for what he called a "once-in-a-century credit tsunami" to lawmakers today in Washington, D.C., claiming, "Those of us who looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders' equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief," as reported in the Wall Street Journal.
Should we be surprised at his surprise? Consider "The Hollow Man," Elizabeth Spiers's essay on Greenspan's ultimate contribution to the economy, published in our September 2007 issue, which takes on the man, the myth, and the mythmakers who made him so.
Jason Biggs, you jerk! I was hot on the trail of a lead -- chasing a truer star than you -- when I had the misfortune of running into your tired, drunken ass. Outside. The Skylight, West Side Manhattan, on Hudson between Dominick and Spring streets. Sometime between 11:30 and midnight. At the T-Mobile Party for the G1 phone, Google's first product launch ever.
We almost collided head-on, and would have, had I not deftly moved aside. But you! You stumbled forward, nearly collapsing into me, then reeling 180 degrees, catching your heel on the tips of my right foot, grinding a pivot directly on my pinkie toe before lurching forward to address the security guard who blocked your way back into the party. As I hobbled out of your way, I wondered, Did the guy who got famous for screwing a pastry really just break my foot? Heather Rosenthal of 4Kids Entertainment confirmed it. "American Pie is so over," the twenty-something comely blonde told her friends, a pair of any-mom-would-approve brunettes lamenting your departure. "You're not going to f**k him, so it's not worth it."
We all lower ourselves a little by attending these launch parties. Media, celebrities, and wannabes alike take advantage of the free booze and finger foods; companies get a chance to create early buzz for their product. But this party -- hosted by T-Mobile -- held particular allure, if only by association. Google, the tech darling poised to take over the world, is coming out with its first consumer product, the G1 phone (actually, the phone itself is made by HTC, but still). And yesterday's earnings announcement indicating Google had beaten analysts' expectations meant it was one of the few companies that truly had something to celebrate in this nail-biting economy. Maybe, just maybe, Sergey and Larry, the Google guys, might show up.
Outside, standing in line for a half-hour waiting to get in earlier in the night, a rumor floated that Lindsay Lohan might appear. Instead, I ended up getting Juliette Lewis dancing away to a cut of AC/DC's "Shook Me All Night Long" and Alan Cumming slipping past the velvet ropes for easy entrance later in the evening, when the party was two hours old. And of course there was you, Jason Biggs, whom my swollen pinkie toe hates right now.
What does a Google launch party look like? For starters, it features a live performance by the Raconteurs, who did not disappoint. There were plenty of exotic drinks like the "Pomegranate Kumquat Crush," a mixture of vodka, honey, and hibiscus that tastes like syrupy cranberry juice. The finger foods were fancy but also accessible enough to include a hot dog station minimally outfitted with ketchup and mustard. I was told the cavernous space could hold 500 to 600 people, but the party peaked at about 400, most of them wielding BlackBerries and Razrs.
T-Mobile flacks would insist the G1 phone was the real star of the party. Stations were set up at the far end of the warehouse-like space, complete with reps to show how to use the phone. Mine had an asymetrical haircut and a neon-green polo. Security detail stood by, ready to "tackle someone if they run off with the phone," as one guard, Martin, put it. There were about 15 guys hired for the event, he told me, as he adjusted his square rimless glasses and toggled his earpiece before setting his gaze to the middle distance, Secret Service-style.
"This is the biggest phone launch in T-Mobile's history," spokesman Tom Harlin told me. "It was important that we come out with a bang." The Google guys, I was informed, would not be appearing. In the middle of the interview, with nary an introduction, the Raconteurs took the stage. I asked Harlin if he was a fan of theirs. "I like the White Stripes," he offered. Had he the chance to talk to Jack White? "I saw him doing a sound check earlier, but I didn't want to bother him. It was better to stand back and let the man be creative."
The real creative wouldn't emerge until after the Raconteurs parted stage right. It was 25-year-old Mike Pearlman, a New Jersey native dressed like he just stepped out of a 1980s time capsule. For a good 20 minutes, he had a crowd circling him as he danced out a routine that incorporated pushups, jumping jacks, and chicken-wing flapping, among other unexpected moves, set to Journey, Daft Punk, and a track from Grease. By day, he works for InfoSync World, a trade reviewer of all things handheld; after hours, he's doing whatever he can to "provide a spark, to help other people get outside themselves. I want to be the person they wished they could be." Later, while he was pantomiming a phone call against the images of the G1's QWERTY keypad relayed by a light projector onto a huge wall, I introduced myself and he agreed to come with me outside to talk.
So what did he think of the G1 phone? He does, after all, fit into the G1's demographic "sweet spot" -- twenty- and thirty-somethings who have a 24/7 mobile lifestyle and want increasing options to staying connected. "It's okay," he shrugged. "The phone itself is not spectacular. Android -- that's definitely mentionable. It is a contender to the iPhone. But I'm not entirely impressed. The phone itself could be better. But I'm not a phone guy. I don't like fancy phones. I would rather use a Zack Morris 1980s phone that gets a 3-foot radius."
But if he had to choose, would he get an iPhone or a G1? "I'm getting an iPhone soon," he replied. "But really, I don't need anything more than a cheap phone. I just want to live out in the country, with dogs, tools, motorcycles, and the girl of my dreams. I'd be happy relatively close to the city, have a room with a trampoline floor, a magic bounce castle, a motocross and dirtbike trail, a vegetable and herb garden. Animals everywhere, kids, happiness -- I want it all." He stops in mid-reverie as if he suddenly remembered where he was, sitting on the sidewalk talking to a reporter. "In fact," he started again, "I have to get back in there because there's more dancing to be had."
He headed back inside while I hobbled off to hail a cab.
"Although the [
Liz Claiborne is leaving its longtime partner, Macy's, for an exclusive partnership with J.C. Penney Co., the women's apparel company announced today. 
As you've likely heard by now, the Federal Trade Commission is trying to reign in freebie-grabbing bloggers and graft-happy social media users masquerading as unbiased critics. The agency announced an update to the FTC Act of 1980, the requisite guidelines for consumer endorsements and testimonials. For many, the takeaway has been this: Bloggers Must Disclose Every Single Freebie Sent to Them From Companies--or Pay an $11,000 Fine. Scary.
