Chiffon margarine ran a series of popular TV commercials in the 1970s, where Mother Nature is fooled into believing that Chiffon Margarine is actually “sweet, creamy” butter.

No doubt fed up with other attacks on nature that were taking place in the 1970s (e.g., polyester), Mother Nature always loses her temper after she mistakes Chiffon for real butter, stirring up wind and lightning and uttering her famous line: “it’s not nice to fool Mother Nature.”

In the version posted below, the scene opens as Mother Nature (apparently taking a break from controlling the seasons and the crop cycle) reads “Goldilocks and the Three Bears” to seemingly random mix of animals.

Modern audiences are not impressed by a little wind and flash of lightning. If the commercial were re-made today, CGI graphics would show lightning bolts shooting out of her hands, perhaps even striking and killing the TV announcer to punish him for his trickery.

Paper cuts only seem to happen during a stressful or tense moment at work. Pure excitement while shuffling paper isn’t enough.

For instance, I can’t recall ever getting a paper cut from opening a present or turning a page in a particularly riveting book.

Work-related tension is the necessary ingredient. Otherwise, a lowly sheet of paper — which always loses to scissors in Rock, Paper, Scissors — cannot cut so deeply.

Hurray for happy, proud elephants and firemen!

Boo for sad, nerdy donkeys with glasses!

Do you like balloons? All good Americans like balloons! So let’s vote for the smiling man with extreme comb-over hairdo!

That’s essentially the message of this 1952 TV advertisement for Dwight Eisenhower:

If you thought American political discourse was on the decline, this video provides some evidence that it’s been bad for a long while. And judging from the color of the faces in this cartoon, another thing that apparently hasn’t changed much is the target racial demographic of the GOP.

By the way, in watching this video, was anyone else reminded of a certain Scandinavian retailer? At least if you’re looking in black and white:

No? Anyone? Maybe it’s just me.

• to think outside the box – v., to attempt to solve a difficult or persistent problem with a creative or non-obvious solution.

The implication of this corporate jargon is that preconceived expectations, tradition, and past practice have muddied our ability to think creatively about a problem. When you encourage someone to “think outside the box,” you’re stressing the need to escape the trap of looking at the issue in these traditional ways.

As with other pieces of corporate jargon, the phrase “to think outside the box” is sometimes misused. At best, it’s a useful phrase encouraging creativity. At worst, it has become into a destructive “inside the box” tradition all of its own. To deal with these different uses, I’ve divided this post into the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.

The Good:

The optimistic message is that if we can escape these constraints (thinking “inside the box”), we can approach the problem in a fresh way and through innovation, creativity, and intelligence, we can solve a problem that has not yet been solved. Nice image, no? After all, who wants to be in a box? Or a cubicle for that matter?

The Bad:

The point of thinking outside the box isn’t to ignore past constraints, but to try to think around them. There’s a difference. In the hands of the mentally lazy, this corporate jargon becomes shorthand for “ignore what happened before,” or “don’t think about the potential consequences.”

Sometimes there’s a very good reason why something hasn’t been done before (e.g., adding aerosolized asbestos to a can of hairspray to reduce flammability).  Sure, fresh and innovative thinking often comes from those who are ignorant of the past and therefore not seduced by it.  Out of the mouths of babes. However, when making the ultimate decision, ignorance of the past is rarely a valuable trait.  It’s why you don’t see many 7-year-olds in senior management positions, Tom Hanks in “Big” notwithstanding.

The Ugly:

Even worse than when it’s used to cheerlead a team into ignorance, is when this piece of corporate jargon becomes a mantle for corporate bullies who rely on it’s rhetorical power to shut down any criticism of their proposals. The corporate bully throws it as an accusation at his or her critics. “Disagree with me? You’re thinking inside the box!”

• to boil the ocean – v., to try to solve too many problems at once, thereby making success less likely; to waste good effort.

Boiling a pot of water is easy, but even Al Gore would agree that you can’t boil the ocean. Failure is guaranteed, and all effort expended in an attempt to do so would be wasted. You’d have no impact whatsoever.

This piece of corporate jargon is similar to the last one. Here’s the basic difference: While the jargon “to drink from the fire hose” refers to an attempt to absorb too much information, “to boil the ocean” refers to an attempt to accomplish too large a task.

When used in its natural environment (a corporate meeting), sometimes this piece of corporate jargon is misused merely as a means of attempting to deflect responsibility for a difficult task. As in this completely fictional usage example:

EMPLOYEE A: “Our new car, the Pinto, may have a teeny tiny flaw. It allegedly explodes in a rear impact. Any ideas to address this?”

EMPLOYEE B: “Well, we could move the gas tank. Or give the car a rear bumper.”

EMPLOYEE A: “Yes, that might solve the problem, er — the alleged problem, but it would require some redesign work. Let’s not boil the ocean here.”

EMPLOYEE B: “Boil the ocean? I thought that’s why we were meeting, to redesign the car so that it doesn’t explode when hit from behind.”

EMPLOYEE A: “Allegedly explode when hit from behind.”

EMPLOYEE B: “Yes, of course, allegedly.”

EMPLOYEE A: “You’re not thinking outside the box. How about a ‘buy a Pinto, get a free asbestos suit’ promotion?”

Republican presidential candidate Tommy Thompson said two weeks ago that it should be legal to fire employees for being gay. Thompson now regrets having said this, but his apologies leave something to be desired.

You see, Tommy Thompson says that it’s not his fault that he gave the answer he did during the debate. He’s a victim! Tommy Thompson’s list of excuses include (this is not a joke):

• a dead hearing aid battery
• an urgent need to use the bathroom
• the flu, bronchitis, and a recent trip to the hospital

Remember the scene in The Blues Brothers when the Carrie Fisher character (having gone homicidally insane after being left at the altar by John Belushi’s character) aims her gun and says “You think you can talk your way out of this? You betrayed me.” The response is a John Belushi classic:

No I didn’t. Honest… I ran out of gas. I, I had a flat tire. I didn’t have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn’t come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake. A terrible flood. Locusts. IT WASN’T MY FAULT, I SWEAR TO GOD.

I’ve pasted this movie clip below.

If you’ve seen the movie, you remember laughing when Fisher’s character appears to be convinced by this rambling series of contradictory excuses. But in the real world, no one is going to be convinced by Thompson. From now on, if you hear anyone give multiple, contradictory or irrelevant excuses for why they did something they regret, this is called a “pulling a Tommy Thompson.”

My friend Laurie was in town last week, and after we had lunch she stopped into a Walgreens to buy an extra pair of dress socks for her husband, who hadn’t packed enough for the trip.

It turns out that Walgreens carries a line of mens’ socks marketed under the trademarked name, “Lookin’ Good, Mister(TM).”

Take a look at the label below. I love how the model is wearing a pair of $3 faux leather shoes, with his bony legs up over the side of the chair, as if to say, “I’m so confident in the attractiveness of my socks, that I’m going to sit sideways in this chair, with my legs hanging over the side to better expose the socks. I’m lookin’ good!”

The real treasure wasn’t on the front of the label, it was on the back, where the sockmakers print some advice they call a “no nonsense tip:”

“Most employers will let you take a break if you’re at your boiling point. If you’re about to do something really stupid at work, walk outside and take a deep breath. You’ll be glad you did.”

The label also urges readers to visit a website, www.nononsense.com, for “more tips on no nonsense living.” I checked out the website, and saw this “no nonsense” tip (among others):

“Love music? Its never too late to start a band. Ask around at work. Chances are someone there plays an instrument. Voila! Or shall we say, ‘Rock On!’”

I like music. According to these socks, this means I should start my own band, and ask various co-workers to join. But wait a minute. Doesn’t this contradict the advice from the same pair of socks, advising me to avoid doing something “really stupid at work?”

Let’s face it, “no nonsense” people do not join bands. They do not ask co-workers to join bands. They wear clean, polyester socks and work quietly in their cubicles. The real “no nonsense” tip should read as follows:

“Love music? Buy an FM radio!”

And what does this have to do with socks?

*This entry is part of a continuing series, dedicated to using the phrase “that’s so gay” as a compliment rather than an insult. Eat your heart out, Rebeka Rice!.*

Take yourself back to a time when Liberace was seen as an eccentric heterosexual with a penchant for fur and candelabras.

The video below was produced during the waning days of what I call the Paul Lynde Era — a time when a person could appear on television in full gay flame, and still be considered heterosexual by the most people.

That Era is clearly over. When you watch the video below, try and take yourself back to the mid-1980’s, when it was still widely believed that George Michael was a heterosexual. I don’t think this could happen today.

(Not sufficiently gay? If the opening sequence doesn’t convince you, make sure you check out the shorts and gloves he’s wearing near the middle of the video.)

• to drink from the fire hose – v., to attempt to learn too much information in a short period of time.

Instead of taking a dainty sip from a water fountain, step up to the fire hose and drink directly from it (without spilling a drop). It’s an impossible task — you’re going to end up soaking wet and looking like a fool. That’s the inspiration for the meaning of the corporate jargon “to drink from the fire hose.” It means that you’re taking on too much, and you’re setting yourself up for failure.

Usage example: “Hi Bill, I saw the slides you are planning to present at the all-hands. Looks like you’re planning to show 75 slides in a 45 minute presentation. That’s too much — you’re asking all of us to drink from the fire hose. Why don’t you scale back your presentation to about 10 slides, and limit yourself to the elevator pitch.”

• to take offline – n., to discuss something later; to set aside a topic of conversation in a until a later time, when a more appropriate group of people can address the topic..

Today’s corporate jargon is one of my favorites. When used correctly, it can help keep a business meeting on track, and it can help make sure issues get discussed in appropriate settings by appropriate decisionmakers. For a usage example, imagine this conversation taking place in a large staff meeting:

BOSS: “As you know, we’re going to be releasing the company’s new product line on January 10.”

EMPLOYEE: “Boss, I’ve already scheduled vacation that week because my pet parrot is having beak replacement surgery. Should I change my plans?”

BOSS: “Thanks for letting me know about your vacation plans, but let’s take that issue offline.”

The Boss is using “to take offline” to mean that he or she wants to discuss this issue further, but in a different setting. The Boss is not indicating that the subject is off-limits — there’s plenty of other good coroprate jargon for that. Instead, the point is to pospone the discussion to a different setting. The staff meeting is the wrong forum.

Sometimes, the issue could validly be discussed in the forum, but in the interest of covering a broad area of discussion, this piece of corporate jargon can be used to set aside the discussion to a smaller, more targeted group of people. For example:

BOSS: “Welcome to the meeting of Acme Enterprises Employee Parking Lot Planning and Construction Committee. Today we’re going to discuss construction of the new parking lot on the East side of the building. Let’s start by talking about what color paint we’re going to use in painting the lines in the parking lot.”

EMPLOYEE: “I think we might need more handicapped parking spots in this new parking lot.”

BOSS: “Good point. Why don’t you and the other members of the Handicapped Spot Subcommittee take that issue offline and get back to the larger Committee.”

The point here is that the subject is relevant to the larger group, but it would be more efficient to dsicuss the issue in a smaller sub-group.

A final note on the meaning of “to take offline”:

Like so many things in life, corporate jargon can be both infuriating and seductive. Today’s example of corporate jargon has both of these qualities. On the one hand, it is useful and well-understood. On the other hand, it’s infuriating because the literal meaning of the phrase is often the exact opposite of the intended meaning. Here’s why:

Take a look at the literal meaning. The phrase stems from the computer term “off-line,” which, according to Merriam-Webster means “not connected to or served by a system and especially a computer or telecommunications system; also : done independently of such a system.” In other words, the literal meaning of taking a conversation “offline” is that you want to take a conversation that is being discussed via some computer or telecommunication system (online) and take it offline, moving it to a live, in-person conversation with real human interaction (“offline”). In reality, though, the opposite is more frequently the case. You’re in a meeting with twenty live, human beings in the room, and when someone says they want to take an issue “offline,” they usually mean “I’ll call you about this later.”

According to wikipedia, Amanda Lear was a disco queen of the 1970s. Unfortunately for me, I’d never heard of Ms. Lear until my friend Mary sent me the clip below.

Now I wouldn’t say that Amanda Lear is talented — in fact I’d describe her singing style as a disco-muppet version of Marlene Dietrich. However, she’s incredibly fun to watch. This video was apparently made for Italian TV in 1983. Dig that 80s style!

This skit from MadTV would be hilarious if it weren’t so painfully true:

Enjoy this 1954 Alice in Wonderland themed TV commercial for Jell-O. It makes no sense at all. It tells us: “For energy, for color, or for playing games, there’s nothing quite like Jell-O.” I didn’t realize that was the trio of qualities one looked for in a desert.

When Alice asks: “Are you the smile my Jell-O or are you the smile on the Cheshire Cat?” I want to respond: “Neither! You’ve overdosed on LSD. Call 911!”
[Thanks to Justin for sending me this video]

In the video below, evangelical minister Ray Comfort talks about God and evolution with his fellow evangelical Christian Kirk Cameron (the former child actor).

Sporting a bold 1970’s-style gay mustache and holding a banana, Mr. Comfort earnestly sets out on his theological journey. But somehow, the presence of a large banana in his hand, the words Mr. Comfort uses to describe the banana, the facial expressions he makes while looking at the banana, all combine to make the video seem very much like a Saturday Night live spoof.

I’d give this video a PG-13 rating for unintentional sexual innuendo. Keep that in mind if you watch at work:

• sanity check – n., broad review and critique obtained from a co-worker immediately before one finalizes a work deliverable; a second opinion.

Usage example: “Barbara, can you please do a sanity check on this e-mail before I send it to the CEO?” The implied question is: “would I be insane to send this email to the CEO, or is it safe to send it out as it is?”

Asking for a “sanity check” sends the signal that you want honest feedback. The phrase is mildly self-deprecating, with the humorous suggestion that you might be doing something less-than-sane. This sends the signal that it’s okay for the reviewer to be completely honest and candid in his or her review. In other words, you’d rather the reviewer tell you that your work product is a piece of junk than tell you that it’s okay to avoid hurting your feelings.

Compare:

“Hi Richard. My manager just told me that I should get your review and feedback on this Report before I submit it. I was planning on submitting it today. Can you please let me know if you have any comments? I’d appreciate it.”

versus

“Hi Richard. I have to file this Report today. Before I do, I’d really appreciate it if you could look it over and give it a sanity check”

By using the phrase “sanity check,” you’re sending the signal that you’re open for real criticism and comment.

The second signal you’re sending the reviewer is that you consider yourself nearly finished with the work product, and the critique should really be limited to “sanity” issues. Presumably, by the time you’ve asked for a sanity check, you’ve put in all the hours you expect and gotten all the detailed feedback from everyone you’d need to. The sanity check is just one last safety opinion — obtained from someone you trust — that is sought immediately before finalizing the deliverable. (I’ll define deliverable in a future post).

With a sanity check, you don’t need or expect the co-worker to spend enormous amounts of time and effort in his or her review. You are merely asking for someone’s broad review for “sanity,” rather than an in-depth second opinion. The kind of feedback you’d expect is: “Great job on your proposed email to the CEO. The one thing I would change is to remove the part of the e-mail where you tell the CEO that find him physically attractive. I’d stick to the main topic of your e-mail, which appears to be about fourth quarter sales estimates.” You wouldn’t expect a line-by-line edit of your work product, nor would you want feedback such as: “Do you really think Helvetica is the right font to send in an email to the CEO? I’m told he’s all about Courier.”

This lovely little piece of corporate jargon changes dramatically if it’s used vertically on the corporate hierarchy as opposed to horizontally between two colleagues at the same reporting level. There’s quite simply no point to asking your boss for a sanity check, since you really want to catch the insanity before it reaches the person who controls your annual review. Also, if your boss asks you for a sanity check, it puts you in an awkward position. When the king comes to you and says: “What do you think of my new clothes?,” it’s kind of hard to answer any way other than to compliment the garments. Same basic principle when the boss asks you if he’s insane: It’s probably a good idea to tell him he’s not.

Thanks to Mary for her sanity check of this blog post. According to Mary, I’m sane!

• to drink the Kool-Aid – v., 1. To believe or to emphatically voice belief in a company strategy, product, or slogan. 2. To have or to claim to have a high degree of loyalty and trust in a company executive, often when others have voiced the opposite view.

In today’s politically correct workplace, many employees are careful to avoid talking to co-workers about controversial subjects and social taboos such as religious cults or mass murder. Today’s piece of corporate jargon is a rare exception to this norm.

The source of the expression “to drink the Kook-Aid” is the hideously tragic Jonestown Massacre — when religious cult leader Jim Jones killed himself and over 900 men, women & children by poisoning them with cyanide-laced Kool-Aid. (Actually, it wasn’t Kool-Aid, it was “Flavor-Aid,” a powdered sugary drink mix very similar to Kool-Aid).

Although the cult members were certainly under duress to drink the poison, the murderous event is sometimes portrayed as mass suicide. It’s this image of blind, suicidal loyalty to cult leader Jim Jones that inspires the use of the phrase today to refer to corporate loyalty and enthusiasm.

It’s perhaps not surprising to hear the term used derisively, to imply that a person’s loyalty is clouding sound judgment, as in this hypothetical scene at a corporate all-hands:

SPEAKER: “I sincerely believe that the CEO’s new idea to shut down all corporate operations, sell all of our corporate real estate, and use the money to purchase three magic beans is a fabulous idea that just can’t fail!”

AUDIENCE MEMBER (to a co-worker): “Wow, the speaker has really been drinking the Kool-Aid, don’t you think?”

Oddly, though, it’s not uncommon to hear the phrase often used in a positive or enthusiastic way, even by the Kool-Aid drinker him or herself, as in:

“Maybe I’ve been drinking the Kool-Aid, but I honestly believe that when we introduce our newest product, the Bass-O-Matic ‘76, this will increase our company’s share of wallet.”

Fun with corporate jargon:

When people use this phrase at work, they’re probably not thinking directly about the Jonestown Massacre. Perhaps they aren’t even familiar with Jonestown. If you hear this phrase used in a lighthearted way and you’re in a particularly sinister and antisocial mood (and if you don’t care about keeping your job), you might consider innocently asking “drink Kool-Aid? What does that mean?” and forcing the speaker to actually explain the source of the jargon. Once the speaker has to explain the disgusting meaning of the phrase, you can make an awkward situation worse by reacting with maniacal laugher in the style of Amy Sedaris: “Jonestown? That’s hilarious!”

This video, made in 1987 by soap opera star Brenda Dickson, is so full of bad advice that it defies the imagination. The first video is about fashion, and contains such nuggets as: “I think it’s important for you to know that… anything goes, today.” The second video (below) is about eating healthy. According to Brenda, alfalfa sprouts are loaded with energy because “they’re still growing,” and she also preaches that sugar causes wrinkles.

Part 1: “Fashion is something that is acquired by looking at a lot of different fashions.”

Part 2: “Sugar causes wrinkles.”

Thanks, Mary, for letting me know about this video.

Regular readers may know that I have an ongoing series of blog entries featuring my favorite bits of corporate jargon (click here to read them). I’ve decided to start a new series, entitled That’s So Gay!

Unlike my teenage nemesis, Rebeka Rice, I use the phrase “that’s so gay” in a purely complimentary way. The idea behind the That’s So Gay! series is to use the highlight funny or clever things that are, well, really gay.

The first entry in the That’s So Gay! series is available HERE.

If you have suggestions for future entries, please let me know by posting a comment here, or by emailing me at:

Only rated-G or PG submissions, please :-)

First of all, there are too many different types of coins. It was cute back in 1976 when they introduced the Bicentennial Quarter for a single year, but now we get a new quarter every four months under the Mint’s 50 State Quarter program.

And, you probably didn’t notice this, but we got five new designs for the nickel starting in 2004. Five new designs for a five-cent coin? Is this an attempt to frustrate an international ring of coin counterfeiters? Wouldn’t it just be easier to tell the counterfeiters that the coin is only worth five cents?

And now I read that the penny is going to be redesigned in 2009. What’s the point in redesigning a coin that people leave behind at the counter? Today, in 2007, the penny is so worthless that homeless people will spit at you if you try to give them one. With inflation, I think it’s safe to assume that by 2009 it will be a crime to try to pay for something in pennies.

Then, there’s the hopeless saga of the dollar coin.

Poor Susan B. Anthony! It was a big deal and a sign of progress when stodgy and old-fashioned US currency was spruced up in 1979 when they put a woman on the new dollar coin. I love Susan B. Anthony. She’s an American hero and was a perfect choice to be on US currency. Unfortunately for Ms. Anthony, they gave her coin a terrible design that looked, smelled, felt, sounded and tasted exactly like the quarter. Even her head looked just like George Washington’s on the quarter. And, in a design element that can only be explained by the popularity of LSD in the 1970’s, the coin’s reverse had the same damn eagle that’s on the quarter, except the eagle on the Susan B. Anthony dollar is flying on the moon. Yes, it was flying on the moon.

Twenty years later, they tried again. Democrats in Congress insisted that they keep a woman on the coin. but the GOP couldn’t think of any female conservative heroes they wanted on the coin. So we ended up with Sacagawea. That one failed as well. And then in 2005, they tried again, with the Presidential dollar coin series (coins to be released starting this month), and this time the only woman that the GOP could agree to was the Statue of Liberty, which is on the back of the new coin. (Apparently the GOP forgot that Lady Liberty is French).

Under the new presidential dollar coin program, there will be a different coin design for every president of the United States. This means the Mint will issue a newly designed dollar coin which nobody will use every four months.

And with quantity, you lose quality. Take a look at the coin design used to honor poor James Madison:

My God, can you imagine carrying this coin in your pocket? No doubt his mangled, cat-like face would scare the other coins. He looks like a deranged madman. I can just imagine a nervous Abraham Lincoln penny finding it’s way to the cell phone in my pocket and dialing 911.

Finally, one thing I’ve always liked about US coins is the way they were cagey about telling you how much they were worth. No numerals. The best example of this is the ten cent piece. Instead of telling you what it’s worth, it just says “one dime.”

And, as if trying to pull a fast one, it’s smaller than the nickel, ensuring that the visiting tourist can never guess the value. The new dollar coin is more worldly, minted with a base and common “$1″ printed on the reverse. I suppose this change would be helpful for tourists — that is, if people actually used the new dollar coin, which of course they won’t.

[Update 3/15/2007 – Slate Magazine has a new, well-reasoned article advocating that the paper dollar be scrapped to encourage people to use dollar coins.}

This is a great political parody of the famous TV commercial that officially launched the Apple Macintosh in 1984. (Younger readers, “Macintosh” is what is now just a “Mac”). It’s ostensibly pro-Barack Obama, but Obama’s campaign was apparently not connected to it’s production:

[Disclaimer: While an easy target for parody, Hillary Clinton is not all that bad. As I mentioned in my earlier post, I'm not a fan, but I'll vote for her if I have to.]

By the way, the original Apple 1984 advertisement is well worth viewing. Released in 1984 and only aired once, it makes reference to Orwell’s 1984 and is clearly suggestive of the 1984 Summer Olympics which were held in Los Angeles and were boycotted by the authoritarian regimes of the Soviet bloc. Twenty+ years later, even after the creation of Windows and the death of the horrible MS-DOS, the video still effectively captures the essence of the battle between the Mac and the PC:

Rebeka Rice, a high school student in California, was disciplined by the school principal after using the phrase “that’s so gay” in a derogatory way.

Her parents have sued.

Rebeka Rice argues that she wasn’t being hateful. Instead, she said that she only meant: “That’s so stupid, that’s so silly, that’s so dumb.”

Hmmm. Isn’t there something hateful about using the word “gay” as a synonym for “stupid, silly, or dumb?” That’s so Rebeka Rice, if you ask me. And by that I mean, “what an idiot.”

I think it’s time to turn the phrase “that’s so gay” into a compliment. Why not? I love The Gays! In that spirit, I submit for you what I believe is the gayest music video I’ve ever seen. I mean that entirely as a compliment. Love it or hate it, how can you watch this video and not think “that’s so gay?”

(Don’t worry, it’s rated G. Or at least PG.)

• share of wallet – n., amount of money people are spending on one product as opposed to a competing product.

Usage example: “We have gained significant share of wallet in the last three quarters.”

Like many pieces of corporate jargon, “share of wallet” is cute and catchy while at the same time slightly vulgar. The vulgarity of the phrase becomes clear after one compares “share of wallet” to the perfectly good term that it replaces: “Market share.” Instead of the clinical, economic, and completely emotionless image of gaining share of the “market,” this term prompts you to imagine your company and the competition fighting for the contents of an individual customer’s wallet. The image leaves the customer out of the equation, with the focus only on a desperate competition for the customer’s money, like wolves fighting over a carcass.

In an earlier post, I claimed that Small Wonder was the worst TV show of all time. Perhaps I was wrong.

Below, I’ve posted a clip of the opening credits to the Brady Bunch Variety Hour. This was the ill-conceived and short-lived follow up to the popular sitcom. It is so absurdly horrible that it begs the question: “What drugs could have produced something like this?”

My favorite touches: (1) the use of kazoos (kazoos!!) for the musical background, (2) the arthritic choreography, (3) the affectionless kiss between TV Mom (Florence Henderson) and TV Dad (the closet-case homosexual Robert Reed), and (4) the producers lame attempt to cut the song short by having the “singers” awkwardly repeat the words “baby face” at the end of the clip. Enjoy:

Every once in a while corporate America takes a word and gives it a brand new definition, totally unrelated to the word’s dictionary definition. Today’s word is exactly this type of corporate jargon.

Dictionary definition:

• penultimate – adj., next to the last.

Usage examples: “I’ve been reading this book for a long time, but thankfully I’m on the penultimate chapter.” Or: “Just walk down that hall, and you’ll find the restroom behind the penultimate door on the left.”

Corporate Jargon definition:

• penultimate – adj., the very best.

Usage example: “Have you seen our new product? It’s the penultimate!” Or: “We’re going to throw the penultimate office Christmas party this year.”

How does something like this happen? Remember the episode of Seinfeld where Mr. Pitt is observed eating a Snickers candy bar with a knife and fork, launching a national trend? It’s like that. It starts simply enough, with one innocent misuse the word by someone high up on the corporate food chain. In the corporate world, as in the rest of life, people tend to imitate those they admire (or those they fear).

If I were a corporate bigwig and I were in a mischievous mood, I might try to change the definition of a word just for fun. I would strategically misuse a word a few times (maybe at an All-Hands or at a staff meeting), and then watch the magic happen.

Here’s the Valentine’s Day edition of Mad TV’s Lillian Verner game show. It’s not as funny as the original Lillian Verner Game Show sketch, but it has a laugh or two:

UPDATE (3/30/2007): Unfortunately, the video was removed from YouTube. Sorry!