Something You Should Know - How Electronic Communication Gets You in Trouble & The History of Your Favorite Halloween Candy

Episode Date: October 25, 2018

We all have those times when we are stressed and need to chill out. So I begin this episode with some proven simple and easy ways to reduce anxiety and stress instantly – and one way is so easy all you have to do is listen a hit song from 1972. https://us.ditchthelabel.org/101-ultimate-ways-chill-reduce-stress/ Most of your communication is probably virtual – email, text, telephone, etc. And as you and probably everyone else has learned, virtual communication can lead to misinterpretation and misunderstandings which in turn can lead to real trouble. Communication expert Nick Morgan, author of the book, Can You Hear Me? How to Connect with People in a Virtual World (https://amzn.to/2D2RPyL) joins me to discuss the pitfalls of virtual communication and how to avoid them so you stay out of trouble. With Halloween approaching I thought it would be fun to uncover the stories behind some of the classic Halloween candy. I am partial to Snickers and Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups and I am sure you have your favorites as well. Candy expert Darlene Lacey, author of the book, Classic Candy (https://amzn.to/2EImfs3) explains the fascinating stories of how many of these iconic candies came to be, where their names came from and why we tend to like the same candy as our parents and grandparents did. Speaking of sweets, why is it that some people prefer sweet snacks while others like salty? And still others like both? We wrap up this episode with the science of sweet and salty and why they are so satisfying. http://www.womenshealthmag.com/health/why-some-people-have-a-sweet-tooth This Week’s Sponsors Robinhood. Go to something.robinhood.com to get your free account and receive a share of stock! Home Chef. Go to www.HomeChef.com/something to get $30 off your first order.  Madison Reed. For 10% off plus free shipping on your first order go to www.Madison-Reed.com/something Hotel Tonight. Download the app Hotel Tonight to your phone and get $25 off your first eligible booking. The Lodge at Woodloch. $50 resort credit off any 2-night stay at The Lodge at Woodloch when mentioning promo code SOMETHING by calling 800-966-3562, Option 2, then Option 1 for reservations. Jet.com. For a great online shopping experience go to www.Jet.com  Stroke of Genius podcast. Listen at Apple podcast or at IPOEF.ORG Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today on Something You Should Know, some simple proven ways to de-stress. One just requires you listen to a particular song from 1972. Then, electronic communication like text and email is good for some things, bad for others. You can never, ever, ever do anything truly important or life-changing via email. You can't fire somebody, you can't hire somebody, you can't break up with them. It's fundamentally chicken-hearted and weasley. Don't do it. Plus, why do some people like sweet snacks, some like salty snacks, and others like both? And with Halloween approaching, you'll hear the fascinating stories behind some of your

favorite Halloween candies. The reason why Reese's Peanut Butter Cups became so popular is because they have this unique taste. And the reason for this is actually caused by an accident. All this today on Something You Should Know. As a listener to Something You Should Know, I can only assume that you are someone who likes to learn about new and interesting things and bring more knowledge to work for you in your everyday life. I mean, that's kind of what Something You Should Know was all about. And so I want to invite you to listen to another podcast called TED Talks Daily.

Now, you know about TED Talks, right? Many of the guests on Something You Should Know have done TED Talks Daily. Now, you know about Ted Talks, right? Many of the guests on Something You Should Know have done Ted Talks. Well, you see, Ted Talks Daily is a podcast that brings you a new Ted Talk every weekday in less than 15 minutes. Join host Elise Hu. She goes beyond the headlines so you can hear about the big ideas shaping our future. Learn about things like sustainable fashion, embracing your entrepreneurial spirit,

the future of robotics, and so much more. Like I said, if you like this podcast, Something You Should Know, I'm pretty sure you're going to like TED Talks Daily. And you get TED Talks Daily wherever you get your podcasts. Something You should know. Fascinating intel. The world's top experts.

And practical advice you can use in your life. Today, Something You Should Know with Mike Carruthers. Hi, welcome. I like to mention from time to time that you can contact me at any time via email with a question, comment, compliment, complaint. I like the compliments more than the complaints, but I'm tough. I can take it. You can reach me anytime by email at mike at somethingyoushouldknow.net. First up today, sometimes you just need to chill out. So here are some proven ways that will de-stress you quickly

when you feel like you're going to lose it. First is smell the coffee. Our sense of smell is 10,000 times more powerful than any other sense in the body. Smelling coffee or citrus fruit helps to de-stress you by creating balance between your nervous system, brain chemistry, and hormones. Eat honey. Researchers in New Zealand confirmed that long-held belief that among its many healing properties, honey reduces anxiety and calms the mind. Have a good laugh or a cry. Both stimulate the vagus nerve,

which reduces the levels of cortisol, the stress hormone, in your blood and increases serotonin production in your brain. A good laugh also boosts your energy, and a study shows that it may improve short-term memory as you get older. Run cold water over your wrists. By dripping cool water on pressure points on your wrist and splashing it behind your ears, you cool the arteries right under your skin,

taking the heat down a notch and calming your entire body. Listen to birds. Real or recorded, the sound of birds in the wild can have a restorative effect on you. And although there is no scientific evidence we can find, people swear that listening to the 1972 song I Can See Clearly Now by Johnny Nash can have instant stress-reducing effects

and make you more optimistic. And that is something you should know. Think for a moment about how you communicate with people throughout your day. I suspect more of it is not face-to-face than is face-to-face. There's telephone, email, texting, social media, even notes and memos on old-fashioned paper. But the point is that it's not face-to-face. And that can lead to miscommunication, misunderstandings, and real problems between people that could be avoided

if you understand the strategies that make virtual communication more precise. And here to explain it is communications expert Nick Morgan. He regularly appears on CNN, and he is author of a new book called Can You Hear Me? How to Connect with People in a Virtual World. Hey, Nick, welcome. Hey, Mike, thanks for having me on your show. It's great to be with you. So I'm sure everyone has misunderstood a text or read something in an email that the sender never intended. So the experience is pretty universal, but it does seem to come with the territory. I mean, without voice inflection or facial cues,

we tend to assume we know what the sender is saying, and sometimes we're wrong. So why do we keep doing it? The conveniences of virtual communication are so powerful that they're here to stay. The issue is just that there is a huge downside that we hadn't been fully aware of and we're slowly getting aware of it, which is that virtual communications strip out the emotional subtext that we're so used to getting face-to-face. We don't think of it this way, but face-to-face communication is actually very efficient for humans. We get together and with rolling of the eyes and nodding of the head and smiling and flinching and scowling, we exchange a huge amount of emotional information with each other about what our intents are, what you think, what you're thinking, what I'm thinking, how I'm reacting to what you're saying, how you're reacting to what I'm saying.

All of that is something that humans care about very much. We care about each other's intent. And so what happens in the virtual world is it's much, much harder to get that intent, to get a clear reading on that intent. And so we struggle. We assume the worst because because in an evolutionary sense, it makes perfect sense for us to assume the worst because that's liable to keep us alive. And so when we don't get information about what the other person's intent is, we tend to assume that they're angry at us or

they're hostile. And that's why emails so often get misread. That's why audio conferences so often create hostility amongst a team. And that's why we get trolling in the virtual world, because people are assuming the worst. We're hardwired to assume the worst so that we can be looking out for danger. Isn't that interesting? You're right. When you see something written down in a text or an email, and it's stripped away of all of that stuff you just mentioned, you do read it in the worst possible way. That's right. One of the unintended consequences of virtual communicating is it's so efficient and so easy, we've created vast amounts more of it. So we're now all information overloaded. As a result, we tend to communicate with shorter and shorter bursts of text and words in an effort to just keep up. And so not only is the affect and the emotional subtext missing, but we're getting more and more telegraphic as we go. And so those one word responses, they just don't cut it.

They assume that they make us assume that the other person is angry at us. And like I said in the beginning, it just comes with the territory. It is what it is. We're hardwired to assume the negative, which leads to misinterpretation. And so what do you do about it? It's just really at base learning a new conversation, getting articulate, getting conscious about how we're feeling emotionally and getting used to putting that back into the conversation where normally in a face-to-face conversation you wouldn't have to. And so I say it all begins with asking the other person, if you don't know the answer to the question, how did what I just say make you feel? And that accomplishes two things. First of all, it suggests that I care about how you feel and that I care about the impact of what I just said had on you. And second of all, it gives you the space to say something. But I can think of a lot of cases where that might

be awkward. I mean, you're almost sounding like a therapist. So how does that make you feel? And there are some relationships and communications where that doesn't really lend itself to, especially in written communication to end, you know, how does this make you feel? So how do you accomplish that? The first thing I would say is get used to emojis. In the business world, there are several studies that show that we're not quite fully ready to adopt emojis because we see them as sort of for kids or sort of juvenile. But they actually are a first limited attempt to put emotions back in. I like to say about email that we've been doing email roughly since the end of World War II.

And the only thing we've really learned since we started is that all caps means you're shouting. That's not much in 50 years. And most of us are not very good writers. And you add to that the fact that we're all moving faster and so typing less and trying to get by with short as possible answers, then it's really time to start getting a little bit more conscious about putting some of those emotions back in. At the very least, give me an emoticon that says, what I just said I meant with a smile as opposed to a sneer. I have always assumed, because I have been victim of the misinterpreted virtual communication.

I've always tried and been conscious of the fact that there's always that potential, which I imagine it'd be good advice for anybody to approach it every time, knowing this could be misinterpreted. But my experience is that shorter is not always better, and that that's where so much of the misinterpretation happens, is because there isn't enough detail in there, and so it's left up to the reader to figure out what is meant. And as we discussed a few moments ago, we typically assume the worst. Is that a fair strategy?

Absolutely. We're still communicating as if we were communicating face-to-face. When we communicate face-to-face, I don't have to tell you about my intent, and I don't have to tell you if I think what you just said hurt my feelings, because you'll see that, and I'll see that. And we're still communicating that way. We write as if the other person could sort of intuit what we're saying, and that's not the case. Words don't convey the same information

as a face-to-face conversation, written words. So absolutely, we need to go longer rather than shorter. We need to go with emoticons and anything else that will help us add emotional context. Which gets harder and harder to do as messages get shorter and shorter, it seems. And you know, one of the fascinating things to me anyway, about how people text and then text back and, oh, that's not what I meant. Oh, this is what I meant. Oh, you forgot to answer this other question that I asked you in the last email. If people just picked up the phone, they could resolve this whole thing in a lot less time than this back and forth and re-explain and, oh, you misunderstood. And yet we don't use the phone or we don't use

the telephone part of the phone. Well, that's right. One of the interesting things about phones these days is it's become more and more seen as an interruption rather than a chance to chat. So something about the nature of our interactions has accelerated so much that a phone call seems like a big deal, whereas it's just much easier to send a quick text message or email message. And yet the problem, of course, is, as you note, that they're much more likely to be misunderstood. And then you have the whole process, which takes much longer than the original phone call would have taken,

to try to unscramble the mess that you've created or the other person created. Since I host a podcast, it's pretty common for me to be asked to recommend a podcast. And I tell people, if you like something you should know, you're going to like The Jordan Harbinger Show. Every episode is a conversation with a fascinating guest. Of course, a lot of podcasts are conversations with guests, but Jordan does it better than most. Recently, he had a fascinating conversation with a British woman who was recruited and radicalized by ISIS

and went to prison for three years. She now works to raise awareness on this issue. It's a great conversation. And he spoke with Dr. Sarah Hill about how taking birth control not only prevents pregnancy, it can influence a woman's partner preferences, career choices, and overall behavior due to the hormonal changes it causes. Apple named The Jordan Harbinger Show one of the best podcasts a few years back, and in a nutshell, the show is aimed at making you a better, more informed critical thinker. Check out The Jordan Harbinger Show. There's so much for you in this podcast.

The Jordan Harbinger Show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever we're wrapped, let's watch it all again. And we can't do that alone. So we're inviting the cast and crew that made the show along for the ride. We've got writers, producers, composers, directors, and we'll, of course, have some actors on as well, including some certain guys that played some certain pretty iconic brothers. It was kind of a little bit of a left field choice in the best way possible. The note from Kripke was, he's great, we love him,

but we're looking for like a really intelligent Duchovny type. With 15 seasons to explore, it's going to be the road trip of several lifetimes. So please join us and subscribe to Supernatural then and now. I'm talking with Nick Morgan. He's the author of the book, Can You Hear Me? How to Connect with People in a Virtual World. So Nick, I love your idea about using emojis in communication because you're right.

I mean, I don't use them just because of what you said, because I think of them as being very juvenile and very unprofessional. And so I don't use them just because of what you said, because I think of them as being very juvenile and very unprofessional. And so I don't use them. And I think women tend to use them more than men do. And so what other kinds of strategies like that, if there are any, that either the research or your opinion or whatever that would help. The first thing to do, and this is a strategy once you've written the email, is to read it aloud to yourself. And this only takes a few seconds unless you've written a book. And try it in various tones of voice. So read it as if it were sarcastic and see if that makes any sense. Or read it as if you were angry and see if that

makes any sense. It's very interesting when you read something out loud, you go, oh, that sounds like that. I didn't mean that. I better add a few words that will clarify my intent. Remember, the key here is intent. That's what other people care about, and your words don't often convey that very well. So reading it aloud is a way of hearing whether what you mean, what you intend is coming across. And so that's the first thing to do. The second is to try to put in various indications of intent. And I like emojis because they're easy. Even if they are a bit juvenile, I think in time, we'll just get more used to them and they'll get the respect they deserve in the business world. But until then, you can put in descriptions of what your

intent is. What I mean here is X. And then the other thing is just understand that you can never, ever, ever do anything truly and deeply important or life-changing via email. You can't fire somebody. You can't hire somebody. You can't break up with them. You can't do a whole list of emotionally significant things via email. Just don't do it. Pick up with them, you can't do a whole list of emotionally significant things via email. Just don't do it. Pick up the phone, see them in person, but don't try to do emotionally significant, life significant things via email. Email is great for exchanging information, for setting up conference calls, for exchanging information of various kinds, it's not great for conveying nuance. I see sometimes, I know people sometimes who have like family fights via text. And I think,

you know, this wouldn't have happened years ago. And I'm wondering, is this a trend, and will this get worse, where people just stop talking to each other and do exactly what you just said not to do, and that is have emotionally charged conversations via text? And what will that do? It's certainly going to raise the depression rate and a few other social indicators that we're not happy about, I'm sure. It's a terrible state of affairs when people are texting each other instead of having significant conversations face-to-face. It just doesn't work as well. And you're absolutely right. I've seen especially millennials who prefer to text because they're controlling the conversation.

The other person can't reply. And so it feels emotionally safer, but in the long run, it's riskier because you're more liable to be misunderstood or to create a misunderstanding. And so it's better to bite the bullet and practice those nonverbal skills and talk to somebody face-to-face. But we've all heard stories of people who have broken up or fired somebody with a text or an email. Terrible behavior. It's wrong. It should not be done. It's fundamentally chicken-hearted and weaselly. Don't do it. That's it. I love that. It's chicken-hearted and weaselly and don't do it. Just don't do it. Just don't do it. So often the advice, as I mentioned before, the advice is

that if you can, rather than send an email or a text to the guy in the cubicle next to you, get up and go talk to him. I mean, that seems like sensible advice, yeah? Absolutely. And good practice. So you don't, your personal skills don't atrophy in this virtual world. Do you think that's happening? Do you think that personal skills are atrophying because people just don't use them? It does take a little practice to learn how to talk to somebody else. A certain amount of our body language is instinctive, but some of it's practiced and socialized as well.

So, yeah, if you don't practice, you won't be as good at it. Is there other research into this that has shed some light or has come to some interesting conclusions that you can share? One of the fun ones is it turns out you're more likely to succeed at work, and in this case it was particularly the consultant's team that was studied, you're more likely to succeed. In other words, have higher billable hours as a consultant if you use more social words in your emails, which is a sign, social words are a sign that you're indulging in chit chat in the email as well as sticking strictly to business. So words like football and coffee,

if they show up in your emails, you're more likely to be successful, which I think is sort of wonderful and hilarious because the first thing, if anybody reading those emails would think was, oh, this person's just doing chit-chat, but it turns out, surprise, surprise, chit-chat is important for business success.

It's the water cooler conversation made virtual. Right. Well, it's important in face-to-face communication too, so why wouldn't it translate over into virtual? And there's a further follow-up bit to the study, which is you're less likely in hard times to get laid off if you indulge in that kind of chitchat. And the same with social media. It turns out we think of Facebook and the other social media as time wasters, things you do to escape from work, but it actually turns out that employees who are effective

and create relevant social media connections are less likely to get fired than those who don't. And so, again, it pays to be social in ways, of course, that are appropriate to your business and whatnot. But it's time to stop thinking about Facebook and the other things as time wasters, but think about them as replacements, as you just pointed out, in the virtual world for what we used to do or had more time to do face-to-face. Those things are important. That's the human glue that keeps us together. On the downside, there's a straight-line relationship between the amount of time that two segments of the population spend on cell phones and their likelihood to be depressed, which I find very alarming. The two populations that have been studied are teenage girls,

because they spend a lot of time on cell phones, but also retirees. One of the original promises of the virtual world was, hey, retirees can stay in touch with their grandkids or their friends and family around the world. It'll be effortless. They don't have to leave their easy chair to do that. Turns out it doesn't work. They still get depressed or they're likely to get depressed the more time they spend on social media. Well, isn't that interesting when you think about it, that in business, being social and being on social media and using social words is actually good for you. And socially, at least as you say in teen girls and elderly people, retirees,

it can actually have a negative effect. But those are really just unintended consequences. It's not why, it's not the reason why we do or don't use virtual communication or social media yeah i think it's mostly i think it's mostly convenience and just the the ease of uh virtual communication so we don't take into account though is the what we've been discussing which is the odds that you're going to screw something up and actually make more work for yourself. Well, but what you were talking about before, that people text because they have more control over the conversation. They can, you know, a real conversation, somebody can call you names and tell you you're wrong and all kinds of things,

and you have to respond right away, but texting is at your pace. That's right, and you can look up the answer, come up with a clever response in your own time. That's the whole asynchronous benefit, as they used to say, of virtual communication. It's something that we all feel. You mentioned earlier that audio conferences and video conferences are situations where a lot of this miscommunication happens. But with audio conferences, you at least have voice and inflection, which is good. And in video conferences, you can have voice inflection and facial expressions. So why is it happening there?

You're hearing the voice, yes, but the way voices are condensed over phone lines, and I could explain the technicalities of it, but the short version is that cuts out a lot of the emotional information that a voice normally conveys. And so it's just a little harder to get emotion on a phone line than it is face-to-face, even if you had your eyes shut face-to-face. I mean, the voice itself doesn't convey as much information. And then if you have a video conference, of course, you're seeing the visual. But remember, a video conference is two-dimensional.

It turns out a sixth sense that we have that we're not consciously aware of is something called proprioception, which is our unconscious mind spend a lot of time tracking where we are in space and where the other people around us are in space. We care a lot about that for obvious reasons of safety. If people get too close to us, then we have to track them very carefully. If people are standing behind us, then we need to know where they are. And so your proprioception tracks all that. On a video conference, you can't do that effectively because what you're looking at is a two-dimensional screen. And so you have no idea where that other person actually is. They seem closer than they are and further away than they are. And it's very

confusing for the unconscious mind. And so that's why we find video conferences exhausting. It's why many people end up shouting at each other on video conferences because they think they're further away than they are. But typically, again, what happens is our threat levels are raised because we see people, but we don't know how far away they are. And so we tend to assume the worst and assume they're crowding our spaces. So you are getting more information than a text, but it's still a very imperfect form of communication, and there's still a lot of emotional information that gets left out. You were talking earlier how in virtual communication, when we don't fully understand the sender's know, we had to postpone this interview because our power was out the other day,

and I had a document I had to print that day. And so I texted my sister-in-law, whose power was on, and I said, can I come over to your house and print this document? And she said, sure, come on over. So later in the day, our power was still out. I texted her. I said, our power's still out, so I'm on my way to print out this document. And she texted back, oh no, I'm on the computer.

And so what I assumed she meant was, oh no, you can't come over now because I'm on the computer. That's not what she meant at all. What she meant was, oh no, your power's still out, bad for you. Good news is, I'm on the computer, I can print it out right now. It had nothing to do with what I thought, and what I thought had nothing to do with what she meant. Right, and that's such a perfect example, because we can easily see both sides of that, and see how it could be misread, and yet we can see what she meant. And you're absolutely right. It's completely the tone that conveys different intent, depending on how you read that. So I love that example.

It's a perfect example of how things go awry so quickly in the virtual space. Well, because when I told her how I read it, when I saw her, she looked at me like, how could you possibly have interpreted that from what I wrote? And yet I couldn't even imagine that she meant what she meant when she wrote it. And this is somebody that you know and trust, presumably, who has a close relation to you. You can imagine how much more easily it is to get things screwed up when we're talking clients or business associates and that kind of thing. So this is a great example. Well, given the way we communicate today, I think this is so important for everyone to keep in mind when they're texting and emailing and using virtual communication. So I appreciate it.

Nick Morgan has been my guest. His book is Can You Hear Me? How to Connect with People in a Virtual World, and there is a link to his book in the show notes. Thank you, Nick. People who listen to Something You Should Know are curious about the world, looking to hear new ideas and perspectives. So I want to tell you about a podcast that is full of new ideas and perspectives, and one I've started listening to called Intelligence Squared. It's the podcast where great minds meet. Listen in for some great talks on science, tech, politics, creativity, wellness, and a lot more.

A couple of recent examples, Mustafa Suleiman, the CEO of Microsoft AI, discussing the future of technology. That's pretty cool. And writer, podcaster, and filmmaker John Ronson discussing the rise of conspiracies and culture wars. Intelligence Squared is the kind of podcast that gets you thinking a little more openly about the important conversations going on today. Being curious, you're probably just the type of person Intelligence Squared is meant for. Check out Intelligence Squared wherever you get your podcasts. Do you love Disney?

Then you are going to love our hit podcast, Disney Countdown. I'm Megan, the Magical Millennial. And I'm the Dapper Danielle. On every episode of our fun and family-friendly show, we count down our top 10 lists of all things Disney. There is nothing we don't cover. We are famous for rabbit holes, Disney-themed games, and fun facts you didn't know you needed,

but you definitely need in your life. So if you're looking for a healthy dose of Disney magic, check out Disney Countdown wherever you get your podcasts. As a kid, I always enjoyed Halloween and trick-or-treating, partly because I've always loved candy. I always knew which house gave out the best candy, and I knew to stay away from the dentist's house because he was giving out toothbrushes, and I had no interest in that. And today, trick-or-treating doesn't seem to be quite as popular as it once was in many parts of the country. But what's so fascinating about candy is the candy that I liked as a kid is still around. It's the candy kids like today. Candy doesn't change much. And the stories behind some of the

great classic Halloween candy are fascinating. Here to tell you about them is Darlene Lacey. Darlene is the author of a great book called Classic Candy. She also has an extensive candy wrapper collection, which is currently on display at the Los Angeles Central Library. Hi, Darlene. Welcome. Well, thank you for having me on the show. I'm excited to talk about the history of candy.

So as it relates to Halloween, when did the idea of, well, let's hand out candy to kids who come to the door dressed as goblins, how did that all start? Well, you know, there's some tales of how this began in Ireland with people going around asking for candy, going door to door. But really as far as it goes in America, back at the turn of the 20th century, there was always Halloween parties. But they tended to be people would come to people's houses and they would get some apple cider and donuts and cookies and that sort of thing. And then slowly but surely, especially during the post-war period,

they began handing out candy a little bit more. And when the baby boom hit, this is when people really started having their kids dressing up in costumes, going from door to door, and it really kicked in. And since then, there's been no turning back. It does seem, over the last several years, maybe decades now, that trick-or-treating seems to have faded in popularity. Just not as many kids are going out ringing doorbells and collecting candy like they used to. Yeah, it does seem like the whole experience of going from door to door for Halloween, that has really died off.

The idea of getting candy from strangers really took a hit starting in the 1960s, and it kind of built up into a frenzy in the 1980s in terms of concerns about tainted Halloween candy. You started to have these stories, oh, somebody has slipped a razor blade in a candy bar or some pins or sometimes even drugs. And these stories began to make headlines and this fevered pitch began to build. And it's interesting because really most of those stories have been disproven over time. They turned out to be more just scares and urban legends.

So a lot of the concern really wasn't all that warranted. And in the 1980s, around 1982, it reached a fever pitch in terms of the paranoia. Hospitals started offering x-ray services to scan the candy before the children would eat it, which I don't know if that's very safe either. And so are there some clear-cut favorite Halloween candies that everybody can agree on? It depends on the region you come from. There was a survey back in 2017 about the most popular Halloween candy from state to state. And as it turns out, New Yorkers love Kit Kats. Californians prefer Almond Joys. Texans like

Three Musketeers. And Alaskans like Reese's Peanut Butter Cups. So it just really depends. But those candies are certainly big favorites. And then other candies like candy corn is still a favorite, I believe, in Georgia. And you have other candies that aren't chocolatey like Swedish Fish can also be very popular. And of course, it's hard to go wrong with gum or bubble gum. Well, what about those big marshmallow peanuts? Oh, yeah. Whoever likes those? Circus peanuts are one of those odd candies because they look like peanuts,

but they're marshmallow and they're banana-flavored. So you have to really wrap your head around the whole essence of the circus peanut to really enjoy it. It's definitely a candy that has faded in popularity over the years, but I know people who still love them, so I wouldn't count them out yet. One of the things I guess I like about candy is it doesn't change much. I mean, the candy that I liked as a kid is the same candy that kids today like. There isn't a lot of room for newcomers, it seems. Yeah, that's the interesting thing about candy. Most of the candy that's popular today was introduced back in the early 1900s. For example, the Tootsie Roll, which was the first penny candy,

it came out in 1896, which was seven years before the first Ford Model A was produced. And then you have other candies like Hershey Kisses. They were made in 1907 when Teddy Roosevelt was president. So when you pick up that piece of candy, you should realize that it's been around for over 100 years. So let's talk about some specific candies. I mean, I like Snickers bars and Butterfingers and Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, and somebody had to have come up with the formula to create these candy bars. So where did they come from?

Well, a lot of the popular candy really came out in the early 1900s, the 1920s. And an example of that would be Reese's Peanut Butter Cups. We think of it as a Hershey candy, but you might ask yourself, well, where does the name Reese come from? And Reese was the name of Harry B. Reese, who worked on one of Milton Hershey's dairy farms. And as he worked for Hershey, he became inspired to become an entrepreneur and start his own candy company as well. So he started making different types of chocolate and peanut candies named after members of his family. And then he heard from a supplier that there was a shortage of peanut-flavored, peanut butter-type candy that was covered in chocolate. People were demanding it. And so Harry Reese decided to start making peanut butter cups. And the reason why Reese's

peanut butter cups became so popular is because they have this unique taste. You know, you might try one from a competitor. It doesn't quite have the same taste. And the reason for this is actually caused by an accident. When Harry Reeseed manufacturing the peanut butter cups, he was using old equipment, and this equipment was slightly burning the peanuts when it was roasting them. And Harry didn't even realize that this was happening until the peanut butter cups started becoming so popular

he bought new equipment and expanded his operation. When he did that, he discovered that the peanut butter cups had lost that magical taste. And so he had to find a way to reproduce it with the modern machinery so that it kept that special flavor. What about Snickers bars? Where did they come from? How'd they get their name? It's one of my favorites, so I'd like to hear that one. Some people might know this, but a little bit of trivia about the Snickers bar is that it was named after the Mars family's favorite horse, Snickers. And here in America, we have known the Snickers bar back from when it was introduced in 1930, but overseas in the United Kingdom for the longest time, up until the 1990s, it was called the Marathon Bar.

And there's no official reason given to explain this, but the rumor is that the Mars company didn't like the idea that Snickers rhymed with the word knickers, the name over there for women's underwear. Well, what an odd thing. And are these candies, like the Snickers bar and the Tootsie Roll, are they basically the same as they've always been, or have they changed? Candy has more or less stayed the same in flavor over the years, over the decades, until really recent times.

We have seen a lot more changes in the recipes of candy bars. A lot of that has to do with the economics of the cost of cocoa. But one interesting story when it comes to a changed recipe is with the Butterfinger Bar, which is another top Halloween candy. The Butterfinger Bar was originally made by the Curtis Candy Company back in 1923, and they were looking for a follow-up to their hugely popular Baby Ruth Bar. And so they came out with the Butterfinger. It was this huge hit, and Curtis Candy thrived for many decades. But after a while, they sold the company, and then they sold it again,

and they sold it a third time to Nestle in 1989. And during the transfer of ownership, apparently, as the story goes, the recipe was lost. And so Nestle had to frantically look to recreate the recipe. So I can't say as a person eating Butterfingers back then that I noticed, so I think they did a good job. But this year Nestle has sold the Curtis candy line yet again to the company that makes Kinder candy and Tic Tac. And this company, Ferrero S.P.A., one of the first announcements they made is that they're going to revamp the recipes one more time to improve

the flavor. So we'll see how that goes, but hopefully it'll be good. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I mean, why would you want a Butterfinger to taste any different than a Butterfinger? I know. Well, it's possible that they just felt that Nestle had already kind of weakened the flavor a bit through some changes. I can't really say for sure, but I have seen this with other classic candy where it's been decided, oh, the candy shouldn't be as chewy or the candy shouldn't be as hard. And so you'll see that sometimes just with different trends with candy making that the candy companies will proactively change the recipes. And being a big fan of classic candy, I'm always against that. I like it the way it was.

Is there any sense as to why the candies that fade away, fade away? Or it's just, you know, it's like restaurants, you know, some make it, some don't. I mean, when I was a kid, a Good & Plenty was really popular. Turkish, Bominos Turkish Taffy was really popular. Nobody seems to be that crazy about them anymore. Well, I know they make them, but they just kind of have lost popularity. Do we know why? I have my own theories about why certain candies have faded in popularity. And these candies, they do tend to be ones that are

strong in flavor, such as licorice or root beer barrels, or even mint has become less popular over the years. And often it's candy that's very chewy or very hard to eat. You know, you have these candy bars like the Black Cow Bar that was meant to be sucked on all day, things like that. I think partially the candies that are hard to eat have kind of faded away because of dental concerns. And then also I think the candies with the stronger flavors, it's just a trend. It depends on how you grew up. People who are baby boomers or somewhere in that age range, they tended to grow up with more of the old drugstore penny candy that was based on these flavors. You had your peppermint sticks. You had your whorehound drops, candies made from molasses. And kids these days, they have grown up more with sour candy.

That seems to be the intense flavor that they're the most familiar with. And so I think, as it is with having a taste for anything, whatever you're introduced to at a young age is something that you tend to appreciate. If you try it later on, you might be a little grossed out by it. I remember the big wax lips that people would chew on, and I don't see those anymore. Are they gone, or it's just I'm out of the loop? Wax lips are one of those funny Halloween candies because they're so improbable. First of all, they call them candy when they're really not a candy at all. They're basically paraffin wax. And for people who aren't familiar with them, wax lips, they were introduced in the late 1940s, early 1950s.

They were really a baby boomer, Halloween candy, where they were exactly as you might imagine. They are big wax lips or fangs, vampire fangs, or mustaches that children could bite down upon and have a little disguise to wear. And after the kids got tired of wearing them, they could start chewing the wax, which had a flavor to it. You could chew it like chewing gum. It wasn't exactly the most delicious gum, but it was something to chew. And actually, you can still get wax lips these days, but they're not as common. You have to find the right store. Where did Three Musketeers come from, and why that name, and what is it?

There's a funny thing about candy today where a lot of the names of candy, they don't make a lot of sense, such as Three Musketeers. Why? And the reason is because when Three Musketeers first came out, it came in three pieces. It was three chocolate bars that came in one package, and they were filled with vanilla, strawberry, and chocolate nougat. And that's the story behind Three Musketeers. And as time went on, due to, again, the economy, particularly back in the 70s, there was a big sugar shortage, and that caused

the price of candy to really zoom high. And so the candy companies started to consolidate and make the candy more economically. And Three Musketeers was one of those bars that took a bit of a hit and became just one candy bar. Wasn't the Milky Way bar considered pretty revolutionary when it came out, and then it spawned Snickers and other candy bars? The Milky Way bar first came out, and it was this huge hit. And the reason for that was because it had nougat. Nougat was a new thing. And there was another candy bar actually called the Fat Emma that first invented nougat for candy bars.

And Mars saw that as an opportunity. They basically perfected the nougat, and they came out with the Milky Way bar, which got its name from the idea that it tasted like a malted milk, a malted milk milkshake. And so that just took off. It became the number one candy bar. And so Mars basically stuck with that formula to make candy bars with nougat, but to add a little bit of this, subtract a little bit of that, change the flavoring, and hence the candy bar line is born.

Any other specific candy story that you think is particularly fascinating that we haven't talked about? Well, one story I'd like to share is the sad and spooky story of Bubble Yum. Bubble Yum, which was a very popular Halloween candy in the 1970s, nearly went out of business because it became the victim of one of the biggest urban legends surrounding candy. Bubble Yum was the first soft bubble gum, and people just went wild over it. But then, nobody knows how it happened, a schoolyard rumor spread that the softness in the gum came from the addition of spider eggs. And people believed that. Sales plummeted, and Lifesavers, the company that made Bubble Yum, had to put out a big PR campaign to quell the fears of chewing Bubble Yum.

And apparently, these advertisements that they put out in the newspaper did the trick. People realized it couldn't possibly be true, and Bubble Yum has survived to this day. Well, it's really interesting to hear the stories behind candy and the popular Halloween candy in particular, so I appreciate you sharing all this with us. Darlene Lacey has been my guest. Her book is called Classic Candy, and she also has an extensive candy wrapper collection,

which is currently on display at the Los Angeles Central Library. There's a link to her book in the show notes for this episode. Thank you, Darlene. As you can tell from that discussion about Halloween candy, I have a bit of a sweet tooth, but other people, they prefer salty snacks. So why the difference? Why do some people like sweet and other people like salty and some people like both. Well, a lot of it has to do with genetics. Our DNA determines how sensitive we are to certain flavors. Those of us with a sweet tooth may have a higher sweet threshold, for example, so we crave more sugar to satisfy our taste buds. By the way, you have about 10,000 taste buds on your tongue. Just about everyone is hardwired to succumb to a sweet taste

because of what happens in your brain. That sweet signal gets sent to the reward center of your brain, which then makes you crave more. Aside from genetics, what you crave today has a lot to do with what you've eaten your whole life. In other words, if you grew up feasting on potato chips, you're more likely to prefer that same salty taste as you get older. And that is something you should know. Your rating and review is always appreciated on iTunes, Stitcher, or wherever you listen to this podcast. I'm Mike Carruthers. Thanks for listening today

to Something You Should Know. Welcome to the small town of Chinook, where faith runs deep and secrets run deeper. In this new thriller, religion and crime collide when a gruesome murder rocks the isolated Montana community. Everyone is quick to point their fingers at a drug-addicted teenager, but local deputy Ruth Vogel isn't convinced. She suspects connections to a powerful religious group. Enter federal agent V.B. Loro, who has been investigating a local church for possible criminal activity.

The pair form an unlikely partnership to catch the killer, unearthing secrets that leave Ruth torn between her duty to the law, her religious convictions, and her very own family. But something more sinister than murder is afoot, and someone is watching Ruth.

Chinook. Starring Kelly Marie Tran and Sanaa Lathan. Listen to Chinook wherever you get your podcasts. Hi, I'm Jennifer, a founder of the Go Kid Go Network. At Go Kid Go, putting kids first is at the heart of every show that we produce. That's why we're so excited to introduce a brand new show to our network called The Search for the Silver Lining, a fantasy adventure series about a spirited young girl named Isla who time travels to the mythical land of Camelot.

Look for The Search for the Silver Lining on Spotify, Apple, or wherever you get your podcasts.