The Daily Grind of a Work @ Home Mom...

Last Night a Twitterer Saved My Life

Oh Twitter.  How did we survive before you.  Sure there was Facebook, MySpace and Friendster, but none seemed to cause the stir that you have brought into our lives.  It's true that some of us are using Twitter for the reasons it was intended by co-creator Dom Sagoll: to update others on our real-time moves.  Others use it to disseminate info about their product or service (often called SPAM).  But like all things happy, there are always those that take a happy thing and make it sad.  In other words, Twitter has its share of rotten apples.

I could give examples that would make your head spin.  The hot topic that's making its way from the social media sites to the traditional media is the story of the mom who allegedly tweeted her way through her 2 year old son's horrific fall into the swimming pool straight through to after he died, about 5 hours later.

One moment she was tweeting about the weather, the next she was asking followers for prayers.  Hours later she was memorializing her son on the popular social media site.

Bloggers and journalists from the US to Israel to Europe and back are judging this mom for everything from who was watching her son while she was busy tweeting for hours prior to his fall to why wasn't she holding his hand as he died instead of tweeting to how could she function adequately to coherently form a sentence and hit the update button.

I'm not judging this woman.  In my mind, it's just another family suffering my own worst nightmare and I feel compassion.  I'm sad that during such a horrific moment, this family has to endure public scrutiny over anything. 

But this situation aside, I am questioning if Web 2.0 has invaded our private lives to an extreme and whether the intense relationships we are fostering with our electronic devices are healthy.  And I'm just not sure.

I get both sides.  Get a life, people!  Disconnect from your computer, get out into the real world, meet a friend for lunch (IRL), enjoy a pat on the back once in a while.  A hug.  A mall.  A real-live relationship.

And then I hear the opposition.  People living in rural areas have been craving more extensive networks and through the Internet this is now available, simple.  Moms who stay home with kids who were formerly lonely and isolated now have friends who are doing the same thing.  People who cannot get out of their houses to work can now receive an income by way of their computers.

But it's my opinion that we might be over-sharing just a tad. 

I read lots of blogs.  Blogs about everything from relationships to the latest and greatest to fashion and celebrities.  I'm mostly drawn to blogs by people who write personal stories, who take the reader on their daily voyage through their life even during their most personal crises.  I currently am following the blog of a woman who is going through a tough time in her marriage and is documenting all for everyone - including her husband, mother and mother-in-law - to read.  So while I wonder how anyone could put so much information out there for all the world to see, I'm drawn to it at the same time.

I've said publicly how I wish in many ways that I trusted the world at large enough to spill my secrets out into it and see what comes back.  I am a writer by nature.  What better way to receive support when you need it most than to write about your troubles and get support in return?  Trouble is, the more you spill into the world, the more you'll get back, and not always in the form that you hope.

Just ask celebrities.  

So do I think this mom need be burnt at the stake for tweeting her way through a tragedy?  I don't.  And in a perfect world only those with something nice to say would say anything at all and those with nothing nice to say would keep quiet.  But it doesn't work that way.  I'm just sorry that we are learning this at some other person's expense.

Why Celebs & Public Figures Should Never Cheat

Humor me for a minute: When you think about the "perfect" life, what comes to mind?  It doesn't have to be your version of the perfect scenario, just what you might envision somebody's ideal situation to be.

Let me go first -

How about tall, good-looking, extraordinarily rich beyond my wildest dreams, enjoying the ultimate success in my chosen field, a beautiful spouse & great kids, blah blah blah.

Sounds nice, right?

So why isn't it ever enough?  I mean, this seems like the golden life.

No one knows what goes on behind closed doors.  No one knows the reasons why people step-out on their spouses.  And while I don't believe that everyone who cheats is necessarily a serial cheater, I do believe that there are often deeper reasons as to why one feels the need to fill a space outside of their marriage.

But I also believe that public figures have a different set of rules than the rest of us.

Double standard?  Maybe.  But if I go out and pursue fame and fortune, it means I'm making a choice that puts me as well as my family in the spotlight.  With that comes certain responsibilities.  I feel like public figures should take an oath much like doctors swear to practice ethics in medicine, so should public people practice ethics in well, their lives. 

Because unfortunately, celebs and public figures do not have private lives.  I don't endorse it, I just deliver the facts.  It's just how it is.

So this is why I think it should be against the law for celebrities to cheat.  For real.  They are paid more money for less work than 99% of the much harder-working population (16 hour days on the set? BOO FRICKIN HOO).  They have at their disposal PLENTY of cash to put toward therapy if they're feeling a little despondent.  I mean, aren't there better ways of dealing with problems than to go out and embarrass your entire family (not to mention yourself) by having sex with someone else?

So based on the simple fact that when you're being watched, you should behave, my advice to celebs is simple:

You're being watched!  Behave!

I mean, even a child knows this...

 

To Vaccinate, or Not to Vaccinate, That is the Question.

So everywhere you turn there is information being thrown at us regarding the H1N1 Flu and the vaccine.  And at every turn is a parent asking, "are you vaccinating?"

We did.  On Monday, both my kids opened their nostrils real wide to accept the H1N1 vaccine.  And while this was ultimately my decision, it was not a decision I came to lightly.

I am not a person who buys into media hype.  I n fact, as the public becomes increasingly panicked about any particular media-induced issue, I tend to become more cynical.  Maybe it's the journalist in me, but I don't trust "frenzy."

Bu I do trust facts from people in the know.

I asked doctors their opinion.  And I asked more doctors.  Then, just to be sure, I asked again.  Every single solitary doctor I asked- from an Internist to a GI specialist to an ER doctor and a Pediatrician - every last one of them not only assured me the H1N1 vaccine is safe, but urged me to vaccinate my children. 

Every last one of them.

They told me that the H1N1 vaccine is prepared no differently than any other flu shot I've given my children and that the hype over the pandemic is what separates it from the regular flu.  As a matter of fact, the H1N1 strain of flu has been included in your regular seasonal flu vaccine each year since 1977, but since this is a new strain, a separate vaccine is being administered.

And yes, people in the high risk groups should get both the H1N1 vaccine as well as the flu shot.  While my instinct was not to administer both the vaccines simultaneously, many doctors do (if they have it - there's a supply and demand issue with both vaccines right now). 

I was reluctant to accept a "new" vaccine for my kids.  But after doing the research, asking health care professionals, finding out how the seasonal flu vaccine and the H1N1 vaccine are similar and different, my reluctance was to wait to vaccinate.  And now that I have, I feel like my children are protected from what I understand to be a horrible, complicated illness.

No matter what you decide is best for your family, there are ways to protect against getting sick - make sure your family washes their hands constantly.  We've been going through that anti-bacterial stuff like crazy around here.  At the very least, you'll be teaching your kids good hygiene, right?

RIP MJ

I just finished watching Michael Jackson's memorial service.  While I didn't begin my day with plans to watch it, I have to say that I'm glad I did and that I was moved by it.

When I first saw the news alert that MJ had been taken to the hospital in apparent cardiac arrest, I IM'd my sister what I'd learned and wrote "Can you imagine if Michael Jackson dies?"  It was the same day Farrah Fawcett died and I believe Ed McMahon was the day before.  Iran was chaos, unemployment numbers were reaching new highs and the economy was, and is, crazy low.  I felt like the world's mood followed the recent weather - grey, rainy, and just down altogether.

Obviously it wasn't an hour before news of MJ's death spread like wildfire, no - faster than a wildfire - across the world.  Instantaneously, it was all MJ all the time.  Every news station was carrying emerging details, some accurate, others less so, surrounding this mysterious death.  

The world was in a state of shock.

I heard people who were upset that MJ's death was upstaging Farrah.  How ridiculous.  If we were actually engaging in a game of 'my death is bigger than your death', I hate to say it, but MJ would win (did I really just say that?).  I actually hadn't known much about Farrah until I watched her documentary which aired about a month before she died.  I felt like I got to know her a little bit in those few hours, and I got to like her as well.  I thought about her every day after that, and was sad when she died.  But while her death was a tragedy, it was hardly a shock.  Nor did it hold any mystery.  MJ's did.  And so, the world wanted to know about the seemingly constant developments.

MJ was also about as big a star as one could be.  Granted his celebrity was often shrouded in strange goings-on as well as negative press, but he was, after all the King of Pop.  Personally, I can recall going to see Michael Jackson's Victory tour in September of 1984.  I was 9 years old and it was the first concert I had been to.  I remember wearing earplugs so as not to burst my fragile, young eardrums.  Tickets cost a whopping $40, considered outrageously expensive at the time.

Even then, there was an air of mystique around him.  Reporters in this 25-year-old piece which aired on Canada's CBC, contributed to the weird rumors that swirled about MJ, including that he talked to mannequins and lived with animals. 

Based on what he would later endure, these allegations were child's play.

Years later, his death is as big as any news of his life.  Only now, we've come to pay tribute to this musical genius, and we seem to have forgotten what we did to him while he lived.  Suffice to say, MJ was put through the wringer, publicly ridiculed and accused of lewd and illegal behavior.  I can't really remember what my thoughts were at the time of the trial, but based on my ambivalence on the topic, I don't think I ever felt passionately one way or the other.

But now it doesn't matter.  But for some reason, it's bugging me that the same media who brought him down is working overtime to inflate his memory to enormous, almost God-like proportions.  I'm grateful to people like Brooke Shiels and his daughter, Paris, for making sure the public knew he was simply an awesome friend, and a wonderful daddy. 

From what I've seen, read, and heard, throughout his life, Michael Jackson only wanted approval.  And it's sad that only in death is he finally achieving what he sought after during his 50 years on earth. 

Mom Bloggers on Fox News

A few weeks ago, I was contacted via Twitter by @Sara_Underwood, anchor at Fox25 News in Boston, asking if she could use a screenshot of my blog for a story on mom bloggers.  Not shy about sharing ;), I invited her to use what she liked.  So while I was not interviewed for the piece (but see my friend @BostonMamas fab spot), I'm proud that my beautiful blog design (by Domestic Chicky Designs) was deemed fab enough by Ms. Underwood to decorate her piece with.  

Maybe next time I'll even get to talk on camera. :)

See the piece here: Mom Bloggers or below.

What goes around comes around.

Look, I don't condone violence.  I don't think using force solves problems, nor do I think it gets a point across.  But Perez Hilton, I do believe in karma.

Karma: that which causes the entire cycle of cause and effect.

Cause: Perez Hilton is long since infamous for offering up his own crass reviews of Hollywood gossip.  He is not shy to opine on, well, anything related to, well, anything.  This is truly critiques without boundaries.

Effect:  He got the crap beat outta him.

Only surprise here is that it hasn't happened sooner.  And remember when I said I don't condone violence?  I also think Hilton got what was coming to him.

Have you watched his loooong vlog which tells his side of the story?  In it, he appears distraught (understandably) but makes some remarks which prove that this "guy" thinks the rules of engagement don't apply to him.  After going through his version of the event, Hilton goes on about how he likes to write about the drama in other people's lives, but that he doesn't want drama in his.

Uh, SERIOUSLY?

Ok - this is deranged on so many levels.  First, if you're the biggest gossip in town, people are NOT gonna like you.  And you know, don't be surprised if they talk crap about you too.  After all, you invented the no-holds-barred approach.

Second - don't you, as a citizen of the world, have some responsibility to it?  Like, are there boundaries at all?  Clearly not since you attack mere children and go on and on about their looks, their bodies, their talent.  (hey, Bruce Willis, where were you when Fight Club broke out?)

Third - why aren't the celebs that he slanders on a daily basis suing this loser?  What about verbal assault?  Imagine sleeping at night knowing you make your living spewing libelous and horrible crap about others on the Internet?  Knowing that what you contribute to the world does nothing other than pollute it?

EW.

Perez Hilton is playing a victim.  This guy needs to get real.  He victimizes the people he badmouths every day.  They are not present to defend themselves against his ridiculous words, the way he was present to defend himself in the fight.  He could've walked away.  He could've taken the high road.  Instead, he hung around (who wouldn't have hit the guy?) then proceded to Tweet/cry to the public.  Words aren't gonna get you very far this time, Perez.

Here's the real issue.  What is this world coming to?  Why are we so anti-everything and everyone?  I know, I know, I blog constantly about the reality TV "people" and have called them d-bags and boring and whatever else I have thought.  But do Heidi & Spencer really count anyway?  Joke people, joke. ;)

Bottom line is anyone who dedicates their life's ambition to gossip and the mean-spirited dissemination of information deserves to get cracked in the face.

Maybe it'll be an improvement anyway.

 

Does the FTC Belong in the Blogosphere?

It's a new form of advertising and everyone is doing it.  And I mean everyone.  Big companies, medium companies, even teeny tiny companies like Alex Casey Baby are taking advantage of the wonderful reach bloggers have and are using it to promote their latest and greatest.  It essentially works like this: company y contacts blogger x (or vice versa) and it is mutually determined that blog x and company y are a good match for a partnership.  Discussions ensue, product or service is provided free of charge by company y, blogger x "tests" said product  or service and voila.  A review post is born.

Simple, right?

Not anymore.

This summer, it is expected that the Federal Trade Commission will set forth guidelines designed to outline how companies can "inspire" bloggers to post about their company's products. Additionally, the FTC will require that bloggers disclose when they're writing about a product that is sponsored and voicing opinions that aren't their own. 

I sometimes refer to this phenomenon as transparency.

It's definitely an issue.  Bloggers are looking for good content and are sometimes selling out in order to arrive at it.  I've seen some blogs who ask for cash in exchange for a review (just wrong on all counts) which begs the question - is accepting cash the same as accepting a sample of the product or products?

Here at The Daily Grind, I require a sample of any product I review and/or giveaway.  The reason is simple and two-fold:

1. I cannot accurately and objectively review a product I have not actually tested, and
2. There needs to be some sort of compensation for services rendered (ie, promoting your product).

But the payback for the sponsor is two-fold as well:

1. They receive a review that (hopefully) is well-read and results in new customers (since moms notoriously trust other moms opinions), and
2. They didn't have to dip into their budget to make this happen.

If I had accepted cash, I would call it an advertisement and those belong in my sidebar to the left.  Sometimes it happens that I am reviewing a product made by a sponsor.  I still require a sample and the review is still comprised of my own opinion.  If I receive a sample that I don't believe stands up to my standards, I simply put it to the side and don't review it.   

There is definitely fine-print when it comes to providing and accepting free product.  First of all, it is my opinion that every blogger should reserve the right to not review any item they wouldn't personally recommend to their BFF despite the freebie.  Also, bloggers who are worth their salt should consider what it is they are accepting - is it a product that looks interesting to you?  Do you think the quality will stand-up to the quality of  your own product (your blog)?  One example is my friend Christine at Boston Mamas.  This wonderful blog is filled with reviews that I know I can trust, simply because she is particular about what she even accepts for review.  Another is Christine at From Dates to Diapers who includes a full disclosure policy which assures readers that while she may have accepted compensation for her opinions, that her opinions are always just that - her honest opinion.  And I think this is what the FTC is looking for.

Recently I signed on to be a Frigidaire Test-Drive Mom.  This means that I was lucky enough to be selected to receive a new range and microwave from Frigidaire, completely free.  In exchange, I will post about my experiences with my new appliances from time to time.  See that button on your right indicating my participation in this program?  This is full-disclosure.  This is my way of letting readers know that I am part of a campaign and not just reviewing the oven I walked in and purchased last week.  And my posts will indicate that clearly as well.

All this to say that I welcome the FTC into the blogosphere with open arms.  As long as they wipe their feet before entering (ie, respectfully and without disrupting the intended spirit of the blogosphere), I welcome them to sift through the rubbish to find the true gems because there are so many gems and we shouldn't settle for anything less.    

Strange Days

There are always strange stories in the news.  Every morning news broadcast includes a regular serving of hard news and a sprinkling of head-scratchers that actually make it more interesting.  Lately there seems to be some real doozies.  Here are a few that have me wondering how people can actually live with themselves.

* The Octuplet Mom.  Nothing really major here, just the fact that this single mother to 14children has time to be on the news, every magazine show and in every major magazine every day/week.  I mean, you'd think she'd be frantically running between the hospital, where her 8 tiny newborns lay, and being in her home where her other kids, aged 2 to 7, are undoubtedly needing their mother.  But somehow she has time for every news outlet that comes a'knocking.  Or so it seems.

* The woman who called 911 three times after being told that McDonald's was out of Chicken McNuggets.  Yes, you read correctly.  She must've been really desperate for fried bits of "chicken."

* The guy who stuffed his cat in a bong and smoked it.  I couldn't make this stuff up now, could I?  He was trying to chill out his hyper cat so he stuffed her into a boxlike homemade bong.  If you're trying to picture this, the 20-year-old moron was smoking through a piece of garden hose attached to a duct-taped, plastic glass box in which the cat had been stuffed.  He's facing drug charges, was cited for misdemeanor animal cruelty and paid a $400 fine.  I think someone should stuff him inside a bong and smoke him.  Or something...     

And in other plain old BAD news:

* The L-Word, Showtime's weekly show about a group of lesbian's in the LA area, is coming to an end on Sunday.  As a straight woman living in the Boston area, the L-Word has become my favorite guilty pleasure.  Almost like the pleasure a voyeur derives from watching people.  Weird, I know.  But hold on!  Showtime has confirmed a spin-off!!  See deets here(but it contains a spoiler about who killed Jenny so read at your own risk!).

* Grey's Anatomy is a repeat.  Don't they know I plan my whole Thursday night around this show??  Damn!

* Rihanna has taken back her abusive boyfriend, Chris Brown.  It's a sad moment for women everywhere.  Who am I to judge but come on.  I mean, really. 

 

Confused about CPSIA?

I was.  Not only that, you know when someone starts talking about something you just don't want to face so you walk away or change the subject?  I was doing that whenever anyone Tweeted anything CPSIA-related or blogged anything CPSIA-related.  It's not like I was turning a blind eye; I did after all send an email to my vendors ensuring that they're all in compliance.  But I didn't get after the ones who either didn't respond (appreciate that, btw) or did respond with "CPSIA what?  What's that?"  (For real, that really happened.)

I was sort of ignoring this whole ordeal because I was confused.  I mean how could any regulation be so poorly written?  How could it be so far reaching?  How could it include me?

Then I read an article on Forbes.com that did a great job of explaining, and I'm feeling a little better informed.  I mean, the writer, Walter Olson hit the nail on the head:

"...CPSIA is now shaping up as a calamity for businesses and an epic failure of regulation, threatening to wipe out tens of thousands of small makers of children's items from coast to coast, and taking a particular toll on the handcrafted and creative, the small-production-run and sideline at-home business, not to mention struggling retailers."

In case you missed my first post on this topic which essentially asked for your support, here's the run-down.  CPSIA is a regulation passed by Congress intended to prevent anything like the Chinese lead-in-every-toy fiasco that occurred last year, from ever happening again.  A good premise gone terribly wrong.  Come February 10th, any and every product intended for use by children aged 12 and under will be subject to expensive third-party testing.  And when I say everything, I mean not just toys, but clothing, towels, bedding, diapers, hair-bows, flash cards and sporting equipment.  Virtually every article produced for use by children under 12 will have to undergo this testing.  This EXPENSIVE testing.

But here's the thing.  Other than the obvious large companies who are equipped to deal with such regulations (and should be, especially when they are coming from China), there are so many thousands of wonderful hand-made products that make our children's wardrobes and toy boxes interesting.   Toys and clothes that contain no hazardous materials.  Books that contain paper and cardboard.  Handmade accessories.  All these items will need to be tested.  And as a result, tens of thousands of small businesses, businesses needed to buy food for families, to clothe children, to pay rent with - all these small businesses will be closed down, lest they be caught and faced with possible prison time or fines of $100,000.  All for selling a product that could not possibly contain any of the materials it is supposed to be tested for.

And all this during a time when the economy is in the worst down-turn since the 1930s.  Could this law suck more? 

And get this interesting tidbit - according to Olson's article, rumor has it the law enforcers are not looking to put small business in the gutter and likely will only enforce the regulation in visible places, like more major manufacturers.  The hand-made goods assembled in a mother's basement as her children napped won't likely attract the attention of the CPSIA (nudge nudge wink wink), but even so, they will be breaking the law each time they sell one.

Ahhhh, the sweet smell of liberty.

There is something SO drastically wrong with a law that is intended to keep lead out of our childrens toy chests, but actually keeps just about everything out of their toy chests, closets, bathrooms, and then some.

By the time all is said and done, so many family businesses will be put down that there will be no money to buy these over-tested items anyhow.

Save Small Businesses From the CPSIA

I'm aggravated.  I'm aggravated because there's this great little line of blingy t-shirts that I want to add to my product offering at Alex Casey Baby and I can't.  I can't because due to the new regulations set forth by the CPSIA, the work-at-home-mom who produces these adorable t-shirts will be closing her doors come February.  And she's not the only one.  Once the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA) goes into effect, small businesses all over the US will be put out of business.

To quote directly from the Handmade Toy Alliance:

The issue:
In 2007, large toy manufacturers who outsource their production to China and other developing countries violated the public's trust. They were selling toys with dangerously high lead content, toys with unsafe small part, toys with improperly secured and easily swallowed small magnets, and toys made from chemicals that made kids sick.  Almost every problem toy in 2007 was made in China.

The United States Congress rightly recognized that the Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) lacked the authority and staffing to prevent dangerous toys from being imported into the US. So, they passed the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA)in August, 2008.  Among other things, the CPSIA bans lead and phthalates in toys, mandates third-party testing and certification for all toys and requires toy makers to permanently label each toy with a date and batch number. 

All of these changes will be fairly easy for large, multinational toy manufacturers to comply with. Large manufacturers who make thousands of units of each toy have very little incremental cost to pay for testing and update their molds to include batch labels. 

For small American, Canadian, and European toymakers and manufacturers of children's products, however, the costs of mandatory testing will likely drive them out of business.

• A toymaker, for example, who makes wooden cars in his garage in Maine to supplement his income cannot afford the $300 - $4,000 fee per toy that testing labs are charging to assure compliance with the CPSIA.
• A work at home mom in Minnesota who makes cloth diapers to sell online must choose either to violate the law or cease operations.
• A small toy retailer in Vermont who imports wooden toys from Europe, which has long had stringent toy safety standards, must now pay for testing on every toy they import.
• And even the handful of larger toy makers who still employ workers in the United States face increased costs to comply with the CPSIA, even though American-made toys had nothing to do with the toy safety problems of 2007.

As a mom, I'm all for safe products.  As an entrepreneur and a mom who sells handmade products, I share the same concerns as other small business owners.  This law is, in effect, too far reaching in that it doesn't distinguish between products that could potentially contain a dangerous lead level, and a product that couldn't possibly contain a dangerous lead level (like my towels for example).  That said, if you are a small-business owner or if you want to help protect the businesses that bring you beautiful handmade and mom-made products, please click the link below and save small businesses from CPSIA.