Who Gets in and Why: A Year Inside College Admissions

Who Gets in and Why: A Year Inside College Admissions by Jeffrey J. Selingo

This is one of the better explorations of the college admissions process. The author has embedded himself with a few universities (Emory, Davidson and University of Washington). He explores exactly what goes on with the admissions committee. He also covers the history of admissions. The schools are responding to changes in rules as well as working to fill they needs. They are building an appropriate class as well as balancing their budgets. They also need to manage their reputation and rate of admits as well as yield rate.

There is a disconnect between what students think is important and what the colleges care about. Students will stress for hours over essays, but committees will often skim them. They are more interested in the voice and uniqueness rather than the typical "overcoming adversity in sports" essays. A laundry list of activities does not set apart a student. (It is better to show significant involvement.) Even grades and test scores may not guarantee admission if they are not paired with other interests.

Another key aspect is that students are rarely compared with each other. They are typically chosen based on their own merits and how they fit in with a class. Only if there are multiple students from a well-known school will there be some comparison of the students academic experience vs. what was available. Even then, the other factors come into play.

College admissions is a changing game. Lawsuits and regulations are changing how admission committees do their work. The financial age process turns the buyer/seller process upside down. It is an area ripe for innovation. However, regulation and fixed costs have made that difficult. 

Red Carpet: Hollywood, China, and the Global Battle for Cultural Supremacy

Hollywood has dominated the entertainment industry. The movies have also helped to spread American culture throughout the world. China liked that idea. They sought to copy the model. At first China would pair with US media. Hollywood films were shown in China. 

China requires films to be "approved" for display in China. The approval requirements are not document. However, Hollywood learned what would allow a movie to be approved and adapted movies to succeed in China. Nudity is a no go, as is pro-Tibet or anti-China content. Movies should also generally show authorities in a good light and not have ghosts. Hollywood studios have taken these to heart and "self-censored" their films to appeal to China. 

Most movie studios are large multi-national companies. This leaves them susceptible to the whims of the Chinese. A movie offensive to the Chinese could result in repercussions for the company even if the movie is never screened in China. Companies do not want to risk their blockbusters and thus are unlikely to greenlight movies that portray China negatively. (Something similar happened in Germany before World War II)

Hollywood studios need the proper balance to appeal to China. Pandering too much will turn off the Chinese audience. A movie like Transformers with built in appeal and Chinese strengths works much better than a western version of China in Mulan. Kung Fu Panda also did great, while Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon did not.

China's next goal is to be a producer. China has produced significant movies in house such as Wandering Earth. However, these are rarely very popular outside of China. Another goal is to arouse patriotism in China. This has been succeeding. It is just not spreading. China continues to encourage the local industry, but is also cautious to prevent them from overpaying for glamor.

China is going down a path that America had gone down a century ago. Will they come to dominate media like they have other industries?

Like, Comment, Subscribe: How YouTube Conquered the World

I'm no longer feeling the warm fuzzies for Google. This book is primarily about YouTube. However, the use of algorithms instead of humans is scary. Algorithms seem good when looking retrospectively. However, for anything future looking, they are subject to manipulation. You get algorithms to respond to algorithms. Do we get to the state where computers are creating videos that are watched by computers and monetized by ads generated by other computers? 

This book is a fairly objective look at Youtube's rise and the many challenges it has faced. Creators often struggle when a simple algorithm change greatly curtails their viewership. Quality is not so important as engagement. Algorithms that pick the next video can easily lead people into echo chambers where their beliefs are amplified. Curtailing one person's hate speech curtails another person's legitimate conversation. To some there is not enough monitoring. To others there is too much. Even Kids Youtube can let not-good-for-kids content slip through. Even worse the "next video" feature can lead people down an endless trail of morass. YouTube as a platform has too much power to influence our thoughts. Yet, there is not anyone that really understands how this power is used. Even monetization is based on algorithms to show the maximum amount of advertisements that don't hurt viewership. It feels like we should keep away, rather than let it be consumed with regularity. 

Wanting: The Power of Mimetic Desire in Everyday Life

We often "want" things not because we have a physical need for them, but because of a social desire. Our "models" also want something, so we feel we must also. People generally like things that are familiar, but not clones. Somebody acting just like their "model" is annoying. Somebody that follows the general accepted behavior pattern is accepted. 

Today, there is a tendency to rely on the wisdom of crowds. Big data allows us to mine minute differences in behaviors. However, the wisdom of the crowds is not necessarily what you want. Some companies, like Tesla go against this and are highly successful.

Crowds cna get whipped up into a frenzy, wanting things because the crowd wants it. A scapegoat can be used to work around this. The scapegoat channels the behavior towards a single entity, preserving others. Money is another means for preserving peace. Interestingly, high inequity is not necessarily bad. People are so different that they don't have the desire. However, closer levels of wealth can create more conflict as people see a possibility.

The writer also has some discussions of the work of Rene Girard in the understanding of wanting as well as the author's personal history of running his company. Many people do jobs because they are driven by others to do them. The quest for a michelin star can be all encompassing for a restaurant and chef. This external desire can get in the way of the internal desire to produce quality food. 

In our lives, there are many things we think we want. The challenge is in finding what we really want, and what is just crowd influence. Meditation and spending time totally disconnected is one way we can help disentangle our desires from those of others.