Politicians speak positions on issues based on what is expedient to them at any moment in time.
Just recently we heard President Obama address the nation regarding
his position on troop deployment in Afghanistan. His position was “no
more free lunch” and he will send 30,000+ re-enforcement troops to
Afghanistan. He then added that we will also set a deadline to pull all
our troops out by June of 2011. He also left a little wiggle room for
possibly changing his decision in 2011.
The Democratic party then marched in footstep strongly approving the
publicized deadline to pull all troops out and bring them home. The
media reported this and the public reacted, both good and bad.
Was This Message Expedient?
The word expedient means: appropriate to a purpose, serving to promote one’s interest, based on or marked by a concern for self-interest rather than principle, something that is a means to an end, something
contrived or used to meet an urgent need. In other words if the market
sentiment on issues changes then it becomes expedient for one to change
their media to match their self interest.
Did the politicians change their message to match their needs or ours? Lets look at previous positions on related issues.
Senator Harry Reid (D-Nevada) said in Jan, 2005: “As far as setting a timeline…. that’s not a wise decision, because it only empowers those that don’t want us there.”
Senator Joe Biden (D-Delaware) said in June 2005″A
deadline for pulling out will only encourage our enemies to wait us
out. It would be Lebanon 1985, and God knows where it goes from there.”
Then Senator Hillary Clinton (D-New York at the time) said in Sept 2005: “I
don’t think it’s smart to set a date for withdrawal. I don’t think you
should ever telegraph your intentions to the enemy so they can await
you”.
Then Senator Barack Obama said in June of 2005:
“A hard fast, arbitrary deadline for withdrawal offers our commanders
in the field and our diplomats in the region insufficient flexibility
for implementing any strategy”
Market Sentiment Can Change But What About Principles?
A principle is a fundamental doctrine or
tenet; a distinctive ruling opinion. A principle is the sum or range of
what has been perceived, discovered, or learned. Knowledge can change
our beliefs over time because new knowledge reflects new discoveries
and thus principles can change.
In the past media reached us through
limited channels of distribution. Today the channels of distribution
grow daily. Additionally past media was produced by the few and today
media is produced by the many. All media is now being indexed,
categorized and stored in “search engines”. These search engines
represent the “universal library” that everyone has access to, at least
most everyone.
Market sentiment is no being shaped,
formed and influenced by the many rather than the few. Sentiment
changes when new knowledge is propagated to the market. Our on-line and
off-line conversations reflect our individual principles or beliefs. If
we change what we believe then our communications to the market need to
reflect the new knowledge we’ve gained which changed our beliefs. By
sharing what we’ve learned and why it changed our beliefs we are
fundamentally serving the greater good of the market.
If we propagate content based on expediency,(read the definition again), we are only telling the market that our intent is aimed solely at our interest vs. the markets interest. Self interest is now transparent and does not reflect the values the marketplace seeks.
Value in today’s marketplace is
fueled by the knowledge we’ve gained and shared. Serving the interest
of the marketplace is different than serving self interest.