Otherwise Occupied
 


Navigation


Syndicate
Syndicate content


User login


 

Why Randal wasn't wrong.

gregh  2005-12-16 22:09       

If you don't watch "The Apprentice," you might want to tune out right now.

Last night, as has been spattered all over the web, so you surely aren't learning it here first, Randal was named Donald Trump's latest apprentice. We didn't always see a lot in the show to make Randal look like a standout. However, we did nearly always see him calm and collected, and most importantly, it was clear that everyone else in the suite thought highly of him. What we know of his history seemed very impressive. BSEE, Rhodes Scholar, masters in CS from Oxford, masters in EE from MIT, MBA from MIT, and a PhD from MIT, after which, he founded what appears to be a successful consulting firm. In short, he may well be the most credentialed, accomplished Apprentice candidate ever.

So, it was no surprise that he won. It's often a surprise when the clear leader of the pack is well liked by everyone. And then the real surprise came when Trump asked Randal what he thought of the idea of a second Apprentice this season. Randal wisely answered, "There may be only one." (Okay, that's Santa talking to Jesus and not Randal to Trump.)

People really seem to think that the Apprentice is a job interview, as if the job is a real job. All you have to do is look at the appearance schedules of the apprentices to know that's not the case. It's a publicity piece, and for those entrepreneurial, it likely helps expose them to lots of people and it gets them lots of exposure. It's not about getting a job making $250,000 a year. The show's in New York, for crying out loud. Lots of people make that.

The show is about getting you noticed. It's about making contacts. It's about consulting and speaking. And in Randal's case, as a part-owner of a consulting firm that has no doubt been inundated by traffic, it's a big advertisement, with the principal having been lauded all the way.

And if there were two apprentices, as Randal said, he couldn't advertise himself as "The Apprentice." He could advertise himself as "one of the the apprentices from the fourth season." The value of winning would suddenly diminish. As the opening of the show said, "It's not personal. It's just business."

There's been lots of talk that this occurred only because Randal's black. Trump couldn't stomach having a black Apprentice, so he had to open it up to the white woman. I can't tell if those who feel that way are stupid, naive, or just so hung up in their paranoia that they can't see reality. Trump needed something new. The "surprise" that had been advertised for weeks, which had to be one of the most poorly kept secrets ever. Offering a second hire would have got people talking, if they hadn't known it was coming. The show's gotten boring. Trump knows that. He's been trying to liven things up all season. This was going to be one more attempt. "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."

Randal made the right call to maximize the value of what being "The Apprentice" is all about.

Not naive
Anonymous (not verified)  2005-12-19 13:44   

Re: your comment that
"Trump couldn't stomach having a black Apprentice, so he had to open it up to the white woman. I can't tell if those who feel that way are stupid, naive, or just so hung up in their paranoia that they can't see reality."

No, they aren't stupid,or naive. Your attempt to discredit a valid concern on the part of many Black Americans through a personal attack sidesteps the possibility that Trump's motivation may not have been so well-natured as you tend to believe.

The fact is, it is an insult to be coerced or manipulated to give away that which one has earned. Randal stood his ground and I support him. You support him too, so that's not the real issue.

The real issue is that you call anyone that would dare question trump's purity of motives stupid and naive, and there really is no place for that. I'd say that you are too naive to see that it isn't a naive notion at all.


Not quite.
gregh  2005-12-19 15:56   

I didn't call people who would dare question Trump's purity anything. I do have a problem with immediate claims of racism, where no evidence of anything of the sort existed. There are much easier, more obvious explanations for what occurred than racism. Kneejerk reactions declaring the possibility of double-hiring racist are stupid, plain and simple.

Beyond that, I saw no coercion or manipulation of Randal in an attempt to make him bend one way or another. I tend to believe, even with what little I know of him from Mark Burnett editing, that Randal would be perfectly capable of handling himself even if he was being coerced or manipulated.


Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You can use Textile markup to format text between the [textile] and (optional) [/textile] tags.
More information about formatting options
 
Browse archives
« August 2008  
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
          2
3 5 6 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            










Akismet spam counter
Proudly protected by Akismet, 2107 spam caught since October 20, 2006