I typically don’t care about celebrity news and I’m guessing that this is the first blog entry that I only write about a certain celebrity and nothing else. No politics, no economy, no culture or anything.
I find this comical. Isn’t it? You may or may not like Paris Hilton, but she’s just a girl. Party girl, but what did she do so wrong? I don’t sympathize with her but I empathize with her, and I find it a bit funny. Something about this is funny; she’s essentially worth billions of dollars. She just parties all her life because she doesn’t bother about anything else. Then, she breaks a traffic law. Nothing serious. Yet, today, she finds herself getting thrown into jail. Pretty funny.
London, May 11 (ANI): It seems that Paris Hilton will really get to experience what a simple life is in the LA prison, where she will serve her 45 days sentence for driving on a suspended license.
The socialite will share a room, which is approximately 12ft by 9ft, with another jail mate and she will most likely get a bunk bed to sleep in, reports the Sun.
The hotel heiress will have to spend the time with all kinds of criminals from habitual robbers to murderers.
…
Read the rest here.
Casual Observation | 11.05.2007 2:10 | No Comments
I don’t think that this generalization is totally off, “Those from developing countries don’t panic.” A while back, I had a co-worker from Russia; I was working for a company in New York City at that time. He was saying that those from Russia manage to make pretty descent livings in US while, if Americas immigrate to Russia, they would probably die. I heard similar things from those from, what is generally called, “developing countries” such as Brazil and India. I agree to a large extent, and I think that this is because those from developing countries don’t panic, and those from developed countries panic when they face big problems (in their eyes).
This generalization can be observed in a developed country itself; it’s not necessary to travel to many different countries to find this out. Here’s an example. Most first generation immigrants in US, i.e., immigrants who were born outside of US and immigrated to US, are from developing countries. Forget ethics, criminality (with regard to the immigration law), moral, legal immigration and what have you for the moment. Most of those from developing countries somehow manage to settle in US, and they generally get permanent residency in one way or the other. You might be against amnesty, but they get permanent residency anyway. How can they do that? It’s partly because they don’t panic. They always think clear-headed, and this is why they manage to find ways to stay in US (forever). Now, are there many immigrants from developed countries like Germany, Japan, France and UK in US today? Not that many. This is partly because they can get whatever they can get in US or perhaps more, but this is also partly because they panic. They go to US, but before their visas get expired, they panic. They start saying to themselves, “OMG, I need to get out within the next two weeks; otherwise, my visa will get expired”, “OMG, I can’t find a job if I just stay and become an illegal”, etc. If their visas get expired in fact, they leave US, acknowledge that they broke the immigration law and they won’t go back to US or they’d make sure that they could enter US without any problems when they enter US next time. Law abiding is a nice way to put it, but, if you put it differently, they don’t think out of the box. They panic and they get short-sighted. I’m being a bit argumentative here, but it is a fact that those from developing countries think about so many options and they don’t panic; they look at all options.
As a side note, this kind of relates to what I wrote about Russia and India.
Casual Observation | 10.03.2007 12:49 | No Comments
I tried to provide a copywriting service as a part of my IT consulting business this month, and I learned a few things about copywriting. I wrote about it in this blog and I received a few comments; those comments educated me a bit also. I chatted about this with a couple of people recently, and this turned out to be a pretty educational experience.
I happened to be finishing up John Grisham’s “The Client” last night, and I noticed something that I never really noticed before as a result of this whole event. I noticed that he writes a bunch of short sentences. Since I can read so many pages continuously when I read his novels, I was thinking that his writing really flows and that he writes long sentences; that just wasn’t the case. John Grisham is a novelist, not exactly a copywriter, so I can’t really say that what works for his novels also work great for copywriting, but his writing definitely gave a different idea of copywriting from ideas that I had before. Lining up a bunch of sentences can flow; it can also become a great copy(That’s what I’m guessing anyway …).
Casual Observation | 26.02.2007 4:08 | No Comments