Archive for July, 2009

My article from City Journal’s Summer 2009 issue called “Digital Wretches” is now up online. It’s about the rise of online-only newspapers and how the local marketplace of ideas in America’s cities is still alive and well. The difference? Well, no one should bank on a staff job anymore. You can read the piece here. You can also listen to me read the story for a podcast (there is currently a link on the City-Journal.org homepage).

Interestingly, Forbes.com seems to have picked it up in its entirety, complete with my picture taken from this website. I wasn’t aware that Forbes and City Journal had this sort of sharing relationship — one of the tricky new things we’ll have to figure out in the digital media world. On the bright side, I guess it’s nice to say I’ve now written for Forbes!

I’m filling out the Penguin Author Questionnaire right now, and so had to come up with a synopsis/blurb for 168 Hours. I’m thinking of something like this:

We all know there are 24 hours in a day; some of us talk of doing things “24-7.” But few of us multiply those numbers together. That’s too bad, because 168 hour weeks provide the most useful framework for thinking about our lives, and how we use our time. The premise of this book is that there is more than enough time in a 168 hour week for building a Career with a capital C, raising a family, getting adequate sleep and exercise, and nurturing your personal interests as well. This book is about how people spend their 168 hours, and how we can all spend them better. It is about focusing on the things you do best and that others cannot do nearly as well. It is about taking your career to the next level while investing in your personal life, and about where the time really goes. Drawing upon vast troves of research about time use in the past and present, and upon hundreds of interviews and time logs, 168 Hours makes the case that we have more time than we think — enough time to really have it all.

I appreciated Naomi Riley’s column today in the Wall Street Journal on “Work and Life — and Blogging the Balance” pointing out the incredible narcissism at work in this sphere. As she notes, women feel the need to share the intricate details of their daily balancing act, pontificate about their choices, defend themselves — often in 10,000 words or more. Perhaps, she suggests, this rumination makes women unhappy (quite possible). On a more fundamental level, it’s probably a waste of time. Time that could be spent, say, working or hanging out with your kids.

While I have probably been guilty of this, too, I was struck, while writing 168 Hours, how low the bar for “effective time management” seems to be for women. I put out a call for people who managed their lives well and would get moms who worked 20 hours a week and had 2 kids and thought they deserved  a medal for their balancing act. Fortunately, I found some other folks who are, say, meeting a 12-person payroll at the small business they own while raising 6 children. They tend not to have time to blog about work-life balance, but hey. There is time for everything that matters.

My review of Miriam Forman-Brunell’s Babysitter: An American History ran in The Wall Street Journal this morning. You can read the piece, “Who’s Minding the Kids,” here.

My review of Jeremy Adam Smith’s book, Daddy Shift, ran at City Journal’s website on Friday.

Key quotes: “Smith’s book arrives at a fortuitous time. Men have accounted for roughly four out of every five jobs lost over the past year and a half, and many have been forced into caregiving roles, whether they wanted them or not. Partially as a result, The Daddy Shift has gotten more media attention than Smith and Beacon Press expected. Unfortunately, much of it has dwelt on the tired image of apron-wearing, stay-at-home “Mr. Moms” bumbling around, learning to cook. A closer reading of The Daddy Shift finds that Smith has uncovered a more valuable insight: that men and women are different, and as men take on more caregiving duties, they are changing the definitions of working and caregiving in ways that people who view the world through the lens of the Mommy Wars cannot see.”

Cruising into 31 weeks, I am definitely looking large, but I managed another 3-mile run/walk today, as I have four other times over the past week. Now that I am truly in third trimester mode, I’ve actually been feeling better about running than I was a month ago. I think it’s a combination of a few things. I’ve been:

* Approaching each run with no expectations. Earlier in this pregnancy (and before getting pregnant) I had specific goals for each run, such as doing sprint repeats, logging 7 miles, or things like that. Unfortunately, toward the end of a pregnancy, some runs are inevitably going to be disappointing. Now, I just aim to be active as much as possible. I’ll try running for a minute and seeing how it feels. Usually, it feels fine to keep going for a few more, then walking for a minute, then running again.

* Focusing on time, not distance. As a pregnant woman, when you work out, your baby works out with you. That means the little dude needs more oxygen too — and since your total aerobic capacity isn’t exactly going up, this means your speed will go down. Consequently, rather than trying to hit my 80-miles-per-month goal, I’m just trying to exercise for a certain volume of time per week (5-7 hours). Most of that is running, but not all of it. If I’m running outside, I aim to just enjoy being outside for an hour, and cover whatever distance I can during that time.

* Getting proper support! You wouldn’t run without a sports bra, and it doesn’t make sense to run without something supporting your belly, either. Amon Maternity sent me a nice supportive band, which I’ve been trying out and like. BornFit’s running shorts have a supportive layer incorporated into the waist band (they sent me a pair when I was pregnant with Jasper and wrote about running for USA Today, and I continued to use the shorts even after giving birth since they’re not obviously “maternity” pants). Long spandex tops or basic belly bands (sold at regular maternity stores) can also help. You have to hunt a little bit for maternity running wear, since unfortunately, most “active” maternity wear seems to be designed for nothing more strenuous than walking around the block.

* Incorporating cross-training. I’ve been logging some serious time on the recumbent bike, and trying to add evening walks into my days as often as possible (it’s a nice thing to do as a family). Last week on vacation at the New Jersey shore, I hiked 10 minutes to and from the beach on the sand roughly twice a day - adding up to about 40 minutes of walking daily (in addition to my runs).

* Recognizing that one bad run is not the end of running. A few weeks ago, I had some rather wretched runs. My shins hurt, I had to go to the bathroom all the time, my legs felt dead and I felt heavy. Fortunately, having run through my entire pregnancy with Jasper, I know that it isn’t all or nothing. If you have a bad run, you take a day off, then try again — walking a lot, then running for a few minutes and evaluating. There’s no pressure, and usually you can handle a few good miles — which really lifts the spirits.

I am making my New York Times debut today with a guest post for Lisa Belkin’s Motherlode blog. The topic? Parents who don’t waste enough time. I am still looking for subjects for “time makeovers” for 168 Hours, so please let me know if you’re interested.

I’ve been trying to figure out what to make of the Washington Post brouhaha today. Politico broke the story that the Post planned to sell access to lawmakers, Obama officials and newsroom staff through small salons at publisher Katharine Weymouth’s house. Companies and lobbyists could buy slots at these salons for $25,000 a seat or $250,000 to sponsor a series.

It is no secret that all media outlets are struggling to find new ways to raise revenue. Holding conferences seems to be the hip one at the moment; NewWest.net, an online-only paper covering the West, is actually breaking even largely because of its conference business. Dow Jones and Fortune hold business conferences all the time. Publications use their influence and relationships to get big names in government and industry to show up, often use their own columnists, reporters and editors as speakers, and charge big bucks for the rest of humanity to attend.

I believe that it’s because this practice is so widespread that the initial Post reaction was more to the language of the marketing flier, which implied that your $25-$250k was purely about buying access, than the actual idea of what was going on.  “Bring your organization’s CEO or executive director literally to the table,” the circular promised. “Spirited? Yes. Confrontational? No.” And most damning: “An evening with the right people can alter the debate.”

The language is crude and makes any journalist cringe. But of course, all these conferences and sponsored events are to some degree about access and altering the debate. A lot more of this goes on in journalism than journalists care to admit. You expect it in women’s magazines, where all the Q&As this month ask “How can I grow longer eye lashes?” Well, one idea is to use Latisse, the new drug approved for this which … conveniently… is advertised in all these magazines. More serious magazines and newspapers try to maintain more of a wall between ads and content. But getting to meet editors and reporters and industry leaders is certainly a reason anyone would attend a publication-sponsored conference. These people can give you publicity or access, and this is worth money. And so you pay for it. Why pretend this is anything else?

The question is more whether journalists should be in the business of sposoring opportunities to interact with their sources, or taking money for access. I guess you can’t blame people for trying, as no one seems to want to pay for content these days. Bloggers accept freebies, magazines run Q&As about their advertisers, and Weymouth holds salons that one imagines Katharine Graham at least didn’t so obviously charge for. People hope they can cash in a little bit of their reputation for currency without losing all of it.

I am nearing completion of writing 168 Hours, and am looking for people who would be willing to keep a time log for 168 hours (a week), and then let me offer tune-up suggestions. Ideally, these people would also be willing to participate in book promotion a year from now.

I’ve been doing these “makeovers” on myself for the past few months. Keeping a time log is not very laborious if you get in the habit (and I have spreadsheets you can use to make it easier). It is amazing to see where the time goes.

As I’ve become more aware of my time, I’ve made a few changes. For instance, I now usually use one of Jasper’s weekend nap times to read fiction. Granted, 2 hours a week isn’t much, but that’s 2 more of my 168 than I was doing before — and it’s enough to plow through a novel or more a month.

I’ve also cut down on time thinking about dinner by loading up the fridge with frozen meat, the pantry with easy sides, and then playing mix & match based on what produce looks good. I saved a reasonable amount of time on shopping for maternity clothes by hiring a personal shopper. And I read the books I’m reviewing during long (but easy) sessions on the stationary bike.

These are the kinds of tune-ups I’m talking about. If you’d be interested in participating in a makeover, or know someone who would, please email me at lvanderkam at yahoo dot com. Thanks!