No Risky Business

A news story out of Ft. Lauderdale caught my interest.  It was one of those how stupid is that kind of stories that instantly makes National news, promoted by major media’s endless need to attract audiences.  It caught my interest not for its circus quality, rather for the context in which it exists, that affects almost all of us, nearly every day.

On May 8^th an 18 month old toddler was denied access on a JetBlue flight from Ft. Lauderdale because she had shown up on a terrorist “No Fly” list.  In fact, she and her parents had already boarded and were required to leave the plane.  How the media got wind of this would be interesting in itself.  According to the news story I read, the plane was held while things were being sorted out. The parents however, incensed by the incident and claiming they were held “on display” during the process, refused to re-board…and so it goes.

What makes this a Pop news story is, of course, its absurdity.  The outrage of the parents is a secondary news bit which touches on ethnic profiling (the family was of Middle Eastern decent) and potential lawsuits.  I don’t think any of those angles equate to the real story behind the incident.  I don’t believe it would have gained much traction had the story lead been “Ft. Lauderdale flight delayed 20 minutes while airline resolves conflict on flight manifest”.  I’d venture that or similar headlines could be churned out by the hundreds hourly. Yet I believe the real story behind this mini-fiasco would gain even less traction.

In financial investing there is a clear concept of risk-reward.  It is clear because the concept (in finance) is usually explained in quantitative terms (numbers), therefore it can even be understood by laymen; the greater the risk, the greater the extent of potential gain, but conversely the greater the extent of potential loss.  Buried in that concept is that there are consequences when there is an attempt to eliminate risk.  The negative connotations simply associated with the word “risk” cloud that fact and the reality that the risk-reward concept pervades perhaps all human endeavors.

The general uses of the term “risk” involve the feared loss of security or safety.  That “loss” can relate to almost anything, for example; property, “happiness”, relationships, careers, or life.  The financial advisor can sit down with a client and easily show on a piece of paper that doing nothing with your investments is neither prudent nor particularly safe.  But who is going to sit down with you and show that an inability to take risk with your time (i.e. actions) can prove counterproductive to your conception of what makes life valuable.  Although not quantitative it still is possible to explain to a reasonably open mind that doing nothing has a good chance of getting you nowhere.  But how possible is it to do the same for the "collective mind”?

We live in an age of pervasive externalized fear.  Of course to view extensive fear as unique to this time and place is as absurd as frisking down 18 month olds for hard core weaponry.  Fear, after all, is our basic primitive emotion for survival and the desire for survival has not changed since the Mystery began.  However, there is an unprecedented collective of fear that is unique to this age, born from levels of human population with no historical comparison and communication which washes over that population at speeds beyond the conception of its users. We are persistently moving in a direction aimed at removing risk from our social order.  The desire to do this relates directly with the communication of fear as applied to mass numbers of people.  Whether it be war, pestilence, violence, natural disaster, or simple loss of property (to name a few) we are beset with a perceived loss of individual control. We are becoming less concerned about the aesthetic short comings of ring around the tub, and more concerned with the deadly germs lurking beneath that ring and of whom may have failed to notify us of that fact for the protection of our children. 

The irony is that in the attempt to sanitize our world and reduce risk we begin to produce a lot of stupid.  The reason we have a situation such as an 18 month old detained because of her potential threat to our society is because there was no one, at that moment in time, who could or would take the small risk to quietly let her and her parents proceed to New Jersey.  The systems were in place to protect the nation from harm (and the company from lawsuits) and they couldn't be altered.  The net result was a whole lot of stupid and probably an equally absurd lawsuit to boot. This same scenario can be found almost anywhere, in our schools, our courts, our businesses, our governments, and all types of institutions. Think about it. That’s the real news story. Maybe that's why the lemmings eventually choose the sea.