Nonstop Express

Time to start dressing the part.

2010-10-11T11:25:00.000-07:00

Ten months ago, I decided to start dressing like a grown-up, you know, suit jackets, tailored trousers, leather-soled shoes, ties, etc. It just hit me one day. I was tired of the never ending "jeans + something" look, and my job had moved from the cloistered world of creative professional to the business and strategy side of things.

Anyway, in addition to the numerous personal changes this effort has entailed, which could be the subject of other posts, I have discovered much of interest on the business side of things, such as:

We are in the groundswell of an "authenticity and tradition" trend in clothes, the importance of which extends beyond lapel widths and country of origin concerns. Craftsmanship and micro-merchandising are in full swing.
The polo/khaki and T-shirt/denim movements have peaked and are ripe for replacement.
Online communities and self-publishing make it easy for people to find mentors, which in turn can have significant impact in a small group of devotees. This points to a failure of mass merchants and provides an interesting opportunity for them.
From a brand perspective, spend your time with the few than trying to convert the many.
Print/Traditional media is not dead. Not by a long shot.

More to come.

Resources/Discoveries
Put This On
Mistah Wong's Brog
A Continuous Lean
Custom shirts from J. Hillburn
Esquire's Handbook of Style
Details' Men's Style Guide
The Suit
Herringbone
Howard Yount
Kent Wang

A primer for all product design from a supposedly passe industry.

2010-03-24T12:13:00.000-07:00

Adrian von Hooydonk, BMWs design director, discussing the new 5 series Gran Turismo.

Replace BMW and cars with any other product or service category, and you have a succinct list of guidelines for today's world.

7:25
Marketing is more about story telling, because Life has become more about experiences than collecting objects or things.

9:52
People are treating themselves in more private, internal ways.

10:45
A vehicle that encourages social interactions and provides luxury...without screaming it.

11:03
Storytelling and narrative a bigger part of the marketing for all BMW models.

11:57
People like to surround themselves with distinct, individual choices.

13:45
Speed of change is greater in Asia, and it deserves greater focus.

16:00
Despite the global reach of the brand, the BMW customer is motivated by the same core desires and values.

20:00
Regarding global competition, you're only as good as your last product or design. But reaching BMW's level of expertise and quality takes many years. Heritage of quality is a key ingredient.

From the archives: Too many notes, Mozart.

2010-02-06T13:51:00.000-08:00

[Written 10/05]

Too much information, running through my brain.
Too much information, driving me insane.
--The Police, 1982

A close friend of mine emailed me recently:

I have 5 email addresses. As of today I have 5,140 songs on my iPod, and I'm considering purchasing a second one. I have Tivo, which is now stacked with shows that I consider interesting and worth watching. I subscribe to 4 podcasts, 3 magazines and 2 newspapers. I send and receive a minimum of 80 work related emails per day--often more than 100. I have voicemail at work, on my mobile and at home.

Your blog is a current of wind in the hurricane that is media in my (and your readers’) lives. Of course it's important to me, but how can we get it noticed above the din of the everyday?

Admittedly, my buddy is a little obsessive/compulsive and suffers from a seriously short attention span. But he's also a prototypical media connoisseur and gadget hound who is drowning under the wave of writing and music available to us all.

Now the blog-savvy smart ass will simply smirk and say, “Dude. RSS. Bloglines.” True enough, But I think he brings up something larger:

We're choking on information.

It’s one of those subversive facts about the Internet: we all supposed to feel so “empowered” because we have all these facts at our disposal. Because we can make our voice heard. And don’t get me wrong, it’s great, the most important invention since the printing press.

But at the same time, my resources far outstrip my time. Sure I can check seven to ten websites and blogs to de-spin something, but it's not practical. Instead, this gnawing doubt that I'm missing out follows me around like a stray dog. And I find myself diving deeper into the Long Tail, mostly discovering new things that match my current tastes and beliefs.

(Fortuntely, Long Tail filters like Amazon, CDBaby and Technorati present the staggering wealth of information in small, suggested chunks. Otherwise I'd go completely bonkers.)

Here's the thing: There are thousands of whip-smart people out there writing blogs that I’d love to read, that I "need" to read, even. But I choose not to sacrifice that much of my time. I’m not a superhero like Mr. Scoble, nor did I buy a ticket on the Cardboard Spaceship.

Marketers and pundits keep telling us that this smorgasbord of choice is a great thing. I'm not so sure. The other day at the grocery store I counted 23 different flavors of single-serving Odwalla juice. 23! And not one of them was what I wanted— plain old apple. As I write this, Technorati is watching 8,479,411 blogs and tracking 1,019,959,253 links. It boggles the mind.

Studies have shown that when confronted with too many choices, we’re apt to do nothing. Or if we do make a decision, we wonder if it was the “best” choice and feel less satisfied about the whole damn thing. Seth Godin talks a little about it here .

I don’t have a specific solution, except what I described in The wisdom of las ondas. Hugh MacLeod over at Gaping Void once blogged something to the effect of “Stop worrying about the technology. Concentrate on trust instead.”

He was talking about marketer anxiety, but I think it applies to dealing with our mega-networked life as well. Let's stop worrying so much about all the information we're missing. Let's concentrate on what we choose to enjoy instead.

Web goodies: Monocle, Instapaper and Quirky

2009-09-06T14:00:00.000-07:00

Interesting finds from this week:

Wondering about the nature of what you do for money? Become a member of Fora.TV and hear what Alain de Botton has to say.

I spent 30 minutes at Monocle and barely scratched the surface. Amazing. Check out this bit on a new shop called The School of Life. (Thank you Poppa L.)

Instapaper may help solve the whole "too many bookmarks, too many computers" problem by just taking the bookmark out of the equation (Thank you, Noah Brier...via Twitter, no less!)

If you've ever wanted to become an inventor but were too afraid to take the leap, or if you think you'd be a product development genius but don't work for Ideo, head to Quirky. It only costs $99 to submit an idea. Giving prod dev and naming feedback is free. (Thank you, Rob Walker.)

Maybe I'm just iltwitterate?

2009-09-06T13:29:00.000-07:00

My last post has been bugging me all week? Why don't I "get it" with regard to Twitter?

How I use the technology constitutes part of the problem. I only used my cell phone to post and track others, and now that seems woefully inadequate if you want to really get the most of Twitter. The typing interface along slows the whole process down, especially since you need to use other people's handles, TinyURLs and tags to mine the tweetstream.

When I started using the service a couple of years ago it was mostly a way to trade small remarks and jokes between a group of friends. I also loved how I could create my own stream and to track the various goings on of people who didn't even know each other. The communication could get so personal and subtle. A lot of fun. Seems very parochial viewed what folks are doing now.

What's really funny to me is that I argued about its value from the beginning and have defended it several times around the dinner table as extended family expressed uncomphrension, disgust and even fear about "this Twitter thing." And now I'm the one who can't seem to change my lens. Twitter must be a great way to find out more about your interests and "meet" people who hold the same, but at this point, getting more information is hardly what I need--I can barely deal with the infostream I've got.

Anyway, plenty of companies are using it to market, sell and develop brands. I'm sure at some point the light bulb will go off for me, too.

"Enough about me. Let's talk about nothing." Why Twitter is bumming me out.

2009-08-30T05:39:00.000-07:00

(image taken from www.csp.org.uk)

I removed the "Follow My Twitter Updates" widget from the right column of this blog. For starters, I haven't posted anything to Twitter in almost a year. (I just can't bring myself to say "tweets" BTW--it sounds so, well, stupid). And the more I see of what actually gets communicated, the more I think it's a waste of time from a macro perspective.

For example, I was pretty damn shocked when I read the aggregate feed of a very disco-looking, well-staffed "social enterprise" consultancy; not only did they seem overly self-obsessed with their constanting posting on a Saturday, but I found only ONE relatively useful piece of information hiding in a whole page of blahblahblah. One. And this from a group of ubersmart people who will guide large enterprises into a new phase of doing business...or at least they'll try to help large enterprises figure out what to do now that the top's been ripped off of our collective Pandora's Box.

This blog provides a place for me to collect and communicate stuff I'd roughly categorize as professional, and so you really don't need to know if the dry cleaner broke a button on my favorite dress shirt, or if I want to say "thanks" to @GlibHandle for something about which you know nothing. Unless, of course, if that broken butten or somethingaboutwhichyouknow nothing pulled the lever in the Pachinko Machine that is my brain and something useful tumbled out.

Pfffft, pffffft, is this thing on?

2009-08-29T12:15:00.000-07:00

I'll save you an explanation of my blogging silence. Those who know me have come to expect it.

Anyway, I found a spare moment a few days ago and stumbled over to Russell Davies. What a gem. The man just plain buries you in fascinating things. Who knew about:

An interesting woman who lives in London named Meg Pickard?

The photographer Jon Cherry?

Matt Webb's presentation at a conference called Reboot, during which he talks about the value of doing something for 100 hours?

Summary of which from Mr. Webb as quoted by Mr Davies:

Because when you contribute, when you participate in culture, when you're no longer solving problems, but inventing culture itself, that is when life starts getting interesting.

And since I actually try to follow the Getting Things Done system, I naturally love the idea of inbox zero.

Bubbles

2009-05-23T11:47:00.000-07:00

Good fun is always to be had when we turn on the bubble machine and just watch those bubbles blow. I caught my two little ones as they were watching the bubbles and trying to pop them.

Missed Delivery: How the New York Times Lost a Loyal Subscriber

2008-12-28T12:00:00.000-08:00

(I hope the New York Times is listening.)

Recently, I canceled my 10-year-old subscription to the New York Times Sunday edition. Nothing shocking here. We moved to Austin, Texas, the Times failed to deliver three weeks in a row, we called to complain, they did nothing, we called again, they did nothing, so we walked.

So instead of shuffling to my driveway to look for the blue plastic bag, I'll just walk/drive up the street to buy the paper. If I feel like it, that is, if some other task or interest doesn't take my attention first. Besides, I can always just go online and read the content there.

But here's what I find interesting about this mundane event: I LOVE reading the Sunday Times.

Even though the sports section talks incessantly about the stupid Yankees, Knicks and Giants, even though the Sunday Styles page trumpeted the goings on of the rich and clueless, this paper, with its great columnists and amazing international coverage, has become an important weekly ritual, one I share with my wife and parents. Sundays are just not quite complete without it. And I subscribed even though there was no financial incentive to do so.

What's so wrong with this picture?

Man, I don't know where to start.

1) In a media market openly hostile to newspapers (and paper in general, it seems) subscriptions would seem to be a valuable asset. It's a relationship formed by years of promises kept and payment made. Now mine has been thoughtlessly tossed aside. If the Times plans to try to generate revenue from my online reading, they have an uphill battle.

2) I was a loyal subscriber who always paid on time, and the Times let me go without so much as a "make-up" offer. I estimate they'll lose at least 50% of my yearly spend. That was money in the bank, direct debit. All they had to do was deliver my freakin' paper.

3) Pushing me to go out to buy the paper physically will install one of those functional irritants that change behavior. Once I get used to NOT reading the Times every Sunday, what's to stop me from simply going to other online sources, like the Guardian or other "liberal news media" outlet? I received The Economist for Christmas. Maybe I'll just buckle down and read that cover to cover instead.

4) The poor quality of the local distribution indicates an operational weakness. Maybe all the attention and worry paid to electronic content delivery has made them forget the importance of keeping promises to customers. This is like a phone company that can't assure you of a dial tone.

5) The lack of initiative displayed by the phone customer service folks indicates a strategic weakness. Perhaps the Times has let the decline in ad revenues blind them to the value of loyal subscribers. Or maybe they don't see paper subscribers as relevant to the digital world. When my wife called to cancel she was offered NOTHING to keep her. Nothing at all. The phone rep processed her cancellation like an address change.

6) My respect for this organization has fallen down a notch. I've been rooting for them (for all the paper newspapers, in fact), because I believe that a vital press is key to a democratic, open society.

I'm encouraged by the growth of so-called citizen journalism, but I believe in the value of professionals, and it seems to me that a smart group of people can figure out how to blend the two for better news and reporting. But if they can't deliver the paper I pre-pay for, and if they don't care enough to try to keep me as a customer, maybe they're doomed after all.

What would I do?

I'm not a newspaper exec. I don't really know the industry. But here are a few simple ideas that might save them a few subscribers:

1) Pay attention to your physical delivery channel. This is not rocket science.

2) Consider offering a financial incentive to subscribe. As I mentioned, I received zero cost benefit for my subscription. Convenience only goes so far. Offer me a special, year-end collection of articles or a calendar or every Krugman/Walker/Friedman column or something.

3) Since paper is disappearing, research the next format of "delivery." I think people will still pay to have special content sent to them somehow. Yes, Times Select didn't work, but paying for content is inevitable and common (HBO, Sirius, iTunes, cable). Just because it's "news" doesn't mean it's a commodity. C'mon, you guys can figure this out. (For starters, spend two hours researching Crossfit.com and The Crossfit Journal.)

4) Don't forget that as humans we're biased and regional by nature. Technology exists to customize information delivery. Use it. Give me my Times. Use predictive modeling (or whatever they call it) to suggest stories I might find interesting. Allow me to choose to read stories that are diametrically opposed to my point of view. Give me a social and personal reason to want to read you. TimesPeople may be a start, but to me it looks like a lot of work. I want the news SERVED to me.

5) Divide up your audience and serve each one. Painfully obvious, the Silents, Boomers, Gen X, Gen Y and Millennials each have different ways of staying up on things. I don't see any reason why NYT content and/or nyt.com can't keep up with them all.

As I said, I hope someone in New York is listening, and not just because I'm a jilted subscriber. The future of their company depends on it.

Tumblr activity had been high.

2008-06-06T11:53:00.000-07:00

Check out my Tumblelog for some interesting links, comments, etc. It's where I bookmark interesting things I come across during my research.

Nonstop Express.2

Looking for what we can't see.

2008-05-26T20:46:00.001-07:00

Due to the completely underwhelming response to my last post, it's up to me to try and make sense of the quotes from Surowiecki and Taleb.

In thinking about it, these points struck me:

• that our complex social and financial systems are vunerable to "inevitable and random accidents"

• that the increasing interconnectedness of said systems spreads the impact of these accidents quickly and unexpectedly

• that the decreasing physical limitations in finance and information further inflate the likelihood of unforseeable events, aka Black Swans

• that humans are markedly incapable of forecasting the unknown

The more connected and digital things become, the more vulnerable the norms are to disruptive change. (This is painfully obvious in media and finance.) It plays into our herd instincts, which as we know, can result in suicidal stampedes and mass delusion.

As a company trying to develop relevant products and tell compelling stories, I think this extends beyond the basic "markets change quickly" bullet point. To me, it means that the illusion of control many of us still cling to has become even more false.

Events and opinions can cascade fiercely, no matter if they're based in fact or not. So, really, what you have to rely on is an honest viewpoint. Be true to yourself and give yourself a fighting chance. Falling back on spin and lies or hubris might save you in the short run, but long-term you'll find yourself without a market or a constituency.

I've got an OCDMBA friend who invariably describes how he's just waiting to wake up one day laid off and destitute. It's a joke, sort of. And although I don't want to live my life waiting for the other shoe to drop, it seems to me that today's world demands that companies actively try to forecast their demise.

If you're not figuring out how someone or something could disintermediate you or what parts of your business have value beyond a single market or audience or technology, then you're setting yourself up to fail. Look at the music industry. Failure to adapt to unforeseen, cataclysmic change. It's probably what we'll be saying about Ford in five years.

And I know that it's close to impossible to forecast the future with precision, but without doing that exercise we confine ourselves to being relevant yesterday, not today. Those unforeseen accidents or flukes are in fact a normal part of existence, so we better do our best to prepare ourselves for their arrival.

Let's play a game.

2008-04-08T19:40:00.000-07:00

I often make mental notes when reading: "Ah, THAT's an interesting connection! Great for the blog." Sometimes, often just before falling asleep, I actually write the posts in my head. But, alas, when I wake up the grain of interestingness or relevance quickly vanishes.

I'm struggling with this right now.

Sitting in my To Do box are an article by James Surowiecki on the bond wackiness that became widely known earlier this year and a printout of an interview with Nassim Nicholas Taleb, author of The Black Swan.

Since I can't remember exactly what struck me about these two pieces, I'm going to give you the two sections I carefully underlined back in February. The idea is that might tell me what you think they might mean--and probably make more interesting connections than I can.

In the more probable case that no one responds, I'll cobble something together in a week or so.

Here you go. Have fun.

Surowieki

In that sense, the potential collapse of monoline insurers looks like a classic example of what the sociologist Charles Perrow called a “normal accident.” In examining disasters like the Challenger explosion and the near-meltdown at Three Mile Island, Perrow argued that while the events were unforeseeable they were also, in some sense, inevitable, because of the complexity and the interconnectedness of the systems involved. When you have systems with lots of moving parts, he said, some of them are bound to fail. And if they are tightly linked to one another—as in our current financial system—then the failure of just a few parts cascades through the system. In essence, the more complicated and intertwined the system is, the smaller the margin of safety.

Taleb

Take the Google phenomenon or the Microsoft effect — "all-or-nothing" dynamics. The equivalent of Google, where someone just takes over everything, would have been impossible to witness in the Pleistocene. These are more and more prevalent in a world where the bulk of the random variables are socio-informational with low physical limitations. That type of randomness is close to impossible to model since a single observation of large impact, what I called a Black Swan, can destroy the entire inference.

This is not just a logical statement: these happens routinely. In spite of all the mathematical sophistication, we're not getting anything tangible except the knowledge that we do not know much about these "tail" properties. And since our world is more and more dominated by these large deviations that are not possible to model properly, we understand less and less of what's going on.

I'm not dead. Really.

2008-04-08T19:17:00.001-07:00

Yes, I'll admit that this blog is on life support.

Five months ago, my wife and doubled the size of our family, and frankly, blogging has fallen even farther down the list of things I should do.

How much time and energy do the little ones require? My fanatical devotion to fanatical exercise has also taken an extreme hit.

What's funny is that during this amazing dry spell (3 posts in nine months!) I've been asked many times about blogging. How you do it technically. How you do it strategically. I always mumble about the technical stuff but then proclaim loud and clear that you must post often and regularly. Fortunately, no one to whom I tell this seems to have bothered checking my own blog output.

I made a New Year's resolution to post one time per week. Cough. Then I changed that to one time per month. Double cough. Now, I think I'll be happy with one every six weeks. We'll see.

Some link goodness:
Fora.tv
The Long Now Foundation
Tiny URL

Oh yes, this Web is tangled.

2008-01-13T20:32:00.000-08:00

Marketing folks love to make charts. One of my favorite is the "purchasing funnel," a much maligned diagram of a supposedly linear train of thought that leads one of us consumer sheep to do something or change an opinion. It's a part of old-think based on a virulently individualistic view of people's behavior and the efficacy of one-way marketing.

The reality, of course, is quite different, more random, more reliant on the opinion of others and serendipitous collisions of interest and information. (I think the funnel really looks more like a tangled ball of string.)

Since I've just finished reading Herd, I've been thinking a lot about how and if our seemingly innate social urges affect how we make decisions, or not. The Internet, of course, is a giant, steaming cauldron of opinions, and a recent pinball thought process brought the idea to life.

It all started with a mistakenly accepted Twitter feed, moved on to the Amazon Kindle, swung by Jeff Jarvis' Buzz Machine and Andrew Keen's idea that the great "democratization" promised by Web 2.0 will actually reduce the quality of our culture.

I know, it sounds weired, but here I go anyway:

As you might know, I've been messing around with Twitter lately. Due to a strange miscommunication with a friend, I've been following the updates of Evan Williams, one of the people who created Blogger and founded Twitter. In one of his "tweets" (last time I use that phrase), he mentioned that he had purchased a Kindle from Amazon.

So, naturally, I check out the Kindle (which looks pretty cool, I think) and then start searching for other opinions on the thing.

Some folks absolutely hate it for it's clunky design, DRM and paid access for direct delivery certain blogs and magazines (although apparently you can also surf the web and get them for free). BoingBoing, in addition to a "yes but not yet" review, points to Amazon's schizophrenia when it comes to digital content delivery. Others, however, love it for the ease of purchase, portability and relatively low per-book cost. (And maybe just because a bunch of other people hate it.)

For the record, if I were a business traveller who read a lot, I'd buy one, which I guess is saying that if I had to travel for work I'd buy one. I care that much about the DRM on a personal level and figure the market will sort that out in the long run. As for it being ugly and clunky, I don't think it's that bad. It's not sleek and sophisticated like an iPhone, yet somehow it "looks" like it fits with a portable book reader. I can't explain why, but it does. Anyway, that's not my point here.

While pondering the whole Kindle thing (Amazon has evidently been selling quite a few of them), Mr. Williams posted about listening to Mr. Keen at a conference--evidently HIS whole "Web 2.0 = Marxism" thing is a bit muted in public as opposed to in print. I haven't read Keen's The Cult of the Amateur, but I imagine that, like most of those "THE NEXT BIG THING" books, once you get inside the story you find the necessary shades of grey and maybe even some points you hate/like depending on your preconception of the book is (like/hate) in the first place.

With this in the back of my mind, however, I stumbled upon a Jarvis postabout the Kindle. Now, I don't follow Buzz Machine, I don't know Mr. Jarvis personally (I'm sure he's a nice guy) and I respect his campaign to call Dell out for its crappy customer service, but his Kindle thoughts made me think that maybe Keen isn't so crazy after all.

Not that Jarvis is some hack posting garbage from the hinterlands, far from it, but his post read like a shot from the hip, based completely on his conception about how a computer-like device should work. He finds the DRM abhorrent, stupid even, and wonders why anyone would pay for blogs they can get for free. It's a great question, but the Kindle is made primarily for BOOKS, not blogs, and reading books on a laptop or iPhone, as he suggests, would just plain suck.

There's a glimmer of an interesting idea in his post about whether the Kindle is a device that's trying to keep an antiquated form of communication alive, but Jarvis seems to have already decided that books are dead...and I'd say that's premature. In either case, he's not the market for the device, yet he fails to mention this, which I think points to a lack of expertise and perspective as a product reviewer. Yet his blog is very popular--and so maybe Keen is right in a way that the web has or will reduce the quality of the information we choose to read.

To be clear, I've got no beef with Jeff Jarvis. Many, many people read him, and he's incredibly involved in the Blogosphere.

Here's my point: Thanks to all these interconnected, online communication streams, your idea/product/service will eventually be subject to reviews and opinions that fall far short of the forethought and research you'd like to see from a mainstream journalist, to say nothing of the on-the-cuff "you suck" posts or deliberate misinformation. (No breakthrough idea there, but it's a bit more complex when you dig into it.)

So, Keen does have a point. But unlike him, I don't think this is a travesty. Sure, it puts tremendous pressure on your "official" communications to be even more honest and objective. It requires you to employ someone to monitor what folks are saying about you. You may even need to address misinformation. But on the other hand, instead of a slow-moving, traditional marketing campaign, you can count on the web to spread the word for you--quickly and for free. And the honest nature of peer referrals makes them so much more compelling than controlled corporate speak.

So services like Twitter play a new, vital role in the mix. One little post from Evan Williams and I set off to see what all the fuss was about. I imagine many others did the same thing. If I had a new product, I'd be trying to get any existing customers to "tweet" about it, that's for sure. As an article from the Harvard Business Review shows, customers who bring others to your company are actually more valuable than those who spend the most.

But that's the topic of another post. This one is already starting to look like a tangled ball of string.

Opportunity in the flight of mass?

2007-10-12T15:44:00.000-07:00

I read an article in the New York Times a few weeks ago about American designer jeans companies. Evidently, many small brands choose to manufacture their lines domestically, specifically in Los Angeles, for both economic and quality reasons.

Overseas, they can't afford the required large runs, nor can they find the expertise needed to painstakingly weather, customize and otherwise jack up beautiful, high-quality denim fabric so hipsters will buy it.

The story made me wonder if that might be the States next manufacturing role; creator and producer of truly unique, practically bespoke products that require more hands-on attention than mass or even mass customized.

We certainly can and will do it with ideas. Making actual things, on the other hand, has seemed to slip away from us.

One thing is for certain, however. Products like +$200 denim require have to be what Chip and Dan Heath call "heavy on ideas." In a recent Fast Company article they discuss how luxury has moved from status to personal pleasure and self-expression.

And that means Ninja Warrior branding and fantastic storytelling, two more things we thrive at in this country.

Who do you REALLY agree with?

2007-10-09T15:39:00.000-07:00

While admittedly crude, this short quiz will give you an idea of which presidential candidate mostly closely aligns with your views, or vice versa.

Funny how our external choice of individual (insert "brand" if you want to get wonky) doesn't always match our internal preference.

My quiz went Dodds, Biden, Obamba/Clinton. I don't even know who Dodds is, and my impressions of Biden are overwhelmingly negative. But my winning total of 36 seems low, so perhaps I don't agree much with anyone.

What about you?

It's not just a matter of laziness.

2007-08-24T10:14:00.000-07:00

Yes, the old blog has gone a bit fallow again. Work, family and exercise have all taken greater amounts of time. And, I freely admit, I'm a super-skilled procrastinator when it comes to writing.

But lots has been going on. I attended my first Likemind in July. The Twitter experiment has been sputtering along. I've been posting things of interest to my Tumblelog--I find it so much easier than posting to the blog. Which falls in with all the latest talk about "micromedia" etc.

And I have some new thoughts on "engagement" to be blogged about soon. (My friend Ambi down in Buenos Aires posted a comment that forces me to respond...just like when we worked together.)

If you're looking for some brain food, check out this presentation made by Mark Lewis. There's some definitely wonky stuff in there, and like all presentations you really need people talking to make it work best, but I think he's on to some very important shifts in how brands need to communicate.

Also, an earlier post discusses the liquid nature of communication, an idea that really fits with my "information is water" schtick.

Why would this be interesting or important if you're not a communications person? Because, man, that's how ideas and information get transmitted, and that's how things move in our world.

What's behind simple engagement?

2007-06-19T12:10:00.000-07:00

I've lapsed on the blogging again. Sorry if you've been checking in.

This will ramble as I'm a bit pressed for time, but in the past two weeks I've been thinking a lot about how specific technologies stick with me.

I started using Tumblr and really like it--I can map my online thought process and share interesting discoveries quickly and easily. It helps me interact more with the stream of information--allows me to export what's running around my head, which in my opinion, represents the start of a creative act.

What's interesting about Tumblr is that it makes it so easy to become more engaged with my online activities. I've read a few things that state that "engagement," as in "brand engagement" or "consumer engagement" is now on the ass-end of the evolution curve, and I guess if you take the term to mean "entanglement" or "amusement" or "sticky" that's probably the case.

I'm thinking more on the lines of "engagé," of taking part, of moving things forward, of being connected to what's happening. Let's call it "hyper-engagement" for the hell of it. That's still important and relevant, in my opinion. Blogs and Tumblr facilitate a greater connection with online life and help me bridge information sources and idea generation. They widen my mental scope and allow me to share that process.

In the communications business we often talk about relevancy and engagement, but the majority of the time we're looking at it from the client's perspective--how to monetize some one's attention span or alter their behavior. Often we stop at relevant and interesting or relevant and persuasive. And perhaps that's all we need to do in the short term.

But I think in the long term, technologies have to create/facilitate/create hyper-engagement, otherwise the tools are just entertainments. Not a bad thing, to be sure, but far from something that pushes advancement or gives rise to new behaviors, or even better, adds a new dimension to our basic human needs.

Here's an example of what I mean: As someone at the very beginning of what demographers call Gen X, I've left texting and tools like Twitter to those with younger and more nimble thumbs. And then I read a great post by Russell Davies (he's a well-known advertising account planner guy who left Weiden and Kennedy to to pursue a mixed grill of interesting pursuits) about being stuck in an airport and how Twitter kept him going.

"Huh," I thought, "He's gotta be older than me." So I signed up as an experiment and invited a few friends, and a couple of them accepted.

Last week it was cool to receive a few small blips from a close friend of ours who's moving her family of five to London. It wasn't much, just some complaints about a crappy Internet connection, but I felt a slightly stronger connection her, even though we didn't really communicate.

It's kinda like Tumblr--pretty much one-way and one-to-many--but it sure cut down the distance between us, if only for a few minutes. I'm interested to see how the experiment develops.

Like a lazy susan of web flotsam.

2007-05-29T15:44:00.000-07:00

Here's another interesting facet of Tumblr. Called Radar, it shows a collection of the latest items posted to tumblelogs worldwide.

Kinda like a mental snapshot. Much shorter than blog entries. But I think you can extrapolate just as much from these crumbs than from longer more journalistic pieces.

The smallest creative partum in action. Or at least a fun way to spend five minutes between meetings and catchphrases.

Getting more and more granular.

2007-05-25T14:28:00.001-07:00

Paul Saffo said something very important when I saw him a few weeks ago. He believes that the companies and ideas that survive will be those that "harness the smallest creative partum."

While thumbing through Russell Davies' blog, I found this.

Now I've got Tumblr. Let's see how it goes.

Signs of Movement

2007-05-13T12:35:00.000-07:00

I attended the 2007 @issue conference a few weeks ago and was treated to an hour of the technology forecaster Paul Saffo.

Among many interesting things, he urged the audience to look for societal/technological precursors, products or services that point to some greater trend or development. I'm just an amateur observer, and nowhere near Saffo's league or level, but I did find it interesting that my Oakland Transbay bus is now equipped with Wi-Fi.

It's a step closer to that omnipresent network, that lifeline we become more dependent on each day. Saffo had an interesting point about this: as soon as a technology reaches a certain level of convenience and availability, we adapt so throroughly that it becomes indispensable.

So, it's not a stretch to see the day will come soon when all of us, not just the geek elite, "count on" our commutes to take care of all manner of important business, like paying bills, making reservations and locating our kids via their GPS phones. Goodness, can you imagine? The bus network is down!

***********

The other day a co-worker brought in a shirt she had purchased at Long's. That's not really news, you can buy lots of stuff at that store, but I was struck by the shirt's design--it reminded me of those $125 models you find in trendy boutiques--and how it managed to make its way to a drugstore chain.

I read a decent NYT article last week about how stores like Forever 21, Zara and H&M have accelerated the time it takes for a particular design to go from designer to discount store. Those chains can put a piece "inspired" by a big name into malls worldwide in around six weeks. This shirt seemed to be an even more egalitarian example; you can get your Mylanta, nail clippers and designer T in just one trip.

So, I wonder how far the high-level designers will get squeezed out of the fashion business, since now people can design their own clothes and retail chains can put new items into the market so quickly.

I can see the day when you'll piece together graphic and fit elements online and just send them to a manufacturer/retailer. Or perhaps, like Threadless, brands will cut out the middleman and just get their stuff directly from the street.

I can see some basic analogies with the entertainment industry. Perhaps the Marc Jacobs and Lagerfelds of the world are singing to an ever smaller and smaller audience. Then again, with their uncanny ability to synthesize past and present, and the enormous marketing clout behind them, maybe they'll just go on staying on top. People like status symbols, and they like to have other people do things for them, something I try to remember when thinking about this crazy, customized, DIY world we live in today.

Looking back to move forward.

2007-04-15T17:34:00.000-07:00

[Note: This is the first in a series of pieces I wrote for another forum. Sorry if you've read them before.]

CrossFit Oakland: Based on an open-source model and stripped down to bare essentials, this gym produces greater levels of fitness, variety and intensity than the typical modern assembly-line health club. Ready for the 21st century old school?

“Fitness” has become huge business. These past 20 years we’ve moved from Nautilus to Spinning to Power Yoga. And along the way, gyms have gone from open, flexible spaces to assembly lines filled with specialized hamster wheels.

Just over a year ago, I stumbled upon CrossFit, a workout system based on old-school exercises I’d mostly heard of but never tried, like the dead lift, push press, clean & jerk, handstand and pull up. It rarely called for extended running, and as I looked at pictures of CF gyms like the one above, I didn’t see any treadmills or elliptical trainers. After trying one of the workouts and nearly passing out, I realized that "cardio" wouldn’t be a problem.

Based on my personal results and those of a few friends, I can state unequivocally that when performed correctly and at high intensity, CF workouts produce far better results than traditional bodybuilding or cardio programs. There are piles of physiological reasons for this (some universally accepted, some the subject of vicious argument), but what truly fascinates me about this system is how remarkably innovative it is while being based on methods available for decades.

Instead of starting with a business model and building a better machine or combining existing protocols into an easily marketed hybrid, the founder Greg Glassman built his program on a true fitness model instead.

He asked a simple question: How do people get stronger, faster and more agile? They perform functional, compound exercises, correctly and quickly with little rest. Combining gymnastics with Olympic lifting and sprint workouts, Coach Glassman developed his program over years,borrowing from other known systems as needed and charting performance in real time on the web.

The result is a type of fitness regimen and gym model unlike any other, one that makes money based on individual affiliate growth and member involvement, not slippage. Instead of simplifying exercises to lessen liability, it asks you to learn complicated movements that can hurt if done incorrectly. Instead of convenience, it places great demands on its users, a decidedly old school idea in today’s world of consumer pampering and indulgence.

But the proof’s in the pudding—strong, powerful, agile pudding that kicks some serious butt.

Berk! Nothing tastes worse than stale blog.

2007-02-28T09:14:00.000-08:00

Sorry to any and all who've visited these past 10 days or so.

I've been up to my neck in work-work and personal work outside the Internet. (Shocking, I know, but there is life in the real world after all.)

Anyway, here's a great site someone at work introduced to me: tiny gigantic.

I usually don't have time to read many blogs. Conversely, my list of ones I'd like to read has grown. But none except tiny gigantic has quite hit the sweet spot between creative, planning, brand wonkiness and bratiness that I've been looking for.

And they've flipped me to some cool stuff, like my new favorite T-shirt and a fascinating short film by Charles and Ray Eames.

I took a business trip to NYC last week via JetBlue, so I should have a post about that experience coming soon.

Oh, and one other thing. Several people from my past have contacted me out of the ether thanks to this blog. It's a great thing to reconnect like that, so if you and I knew each other way back then, please don't hesitate to say hi. I'd love to hear from you.

"Talk to me" may have nothing to do with speech.

2007-02-05T15:09:00.000-08:00

One side of a cell phone conversation overheard this morning as I walked to the local Peet's:

"Um, yeah, so like I talked to Dave about Brian."

"Yeah, he was like all mad 'cause I'm gonna move out and stuff."

"I don't know. I was talking to him on IM and I go 'What if Brian moves in?' And he goes 'What do you mean?' And I go 'Cause I'm moving out.' And he's all like 'Whatever.'

The superlative 20-something diction aside, what strikes me about this exchange is that instant messaging holds equal footage with live voice communication. In fact, even the roommate's negative tone of voice came across loud and clear.

This lack of distinction points to much more than just convenience. It speaks to a broader conception of what it means to communicate.

For me, the more emotionally meaningful or complicated the conversation, the more "valuable" the method I'll employ, roughly following this list:

1) Person to person
2) Live phone conversation
3) Mailed letter
4) Voice mail
5) Email
6) IM

Dropping a bomb on someone via IM seems pretty cheap and passive--but that's just me. Although it may still be considered that way by people who use IM all the time (I've heard multiple sob stories about IM breakups), it's also clear this method of communicating stands on equal footing with actual speech.

I think we need to keep this fact in mind when telling stories in multiple channels. Our tone of voice still carries in the online world, and many of the people we're "talking to" may see little to no difference between the tongue and the keyboard.

iPhone: the architecture of communication.

2007-01-27T12:03:00.000-08:00

Apple’s introduction of the iPhone caused an expected murmur of excitement among the guys on my email list. It also produced some disagreement: is the device a truly "revolutionary" step in personal communication or just another successful case of combining existing technologies?

I am in the former camp but found myself unable to clearly articulate exactly why. While reading "The Architecture of Happiness" by Alain de Bottonthe other day I suddenly understood my hunch.

Early in the book, he briefly outlines a false dichotomy regarding the importance of architecture or lack thereof--that people seem divided between an urge to a) numb our senses to the effect of the aesthetic and b) acknowledge the extent to which our identities are connected to our locations. It's a continuation of the old form versus function argument.

Given design's rise to dominance in the past decade, I think it's safe to say that looks definitely matter, but in the iPhone I see something more profound than that. It's a question of environment.

De Botton also states that certain works of architecture invite us to be certain people within their walls, that buildings "talk" to us about the type of life that can unfold within and around them. So, in some way, a Modern building fits people who like order and are orderly, or the owners of a Tuscan home exhibit natural grace and hospitality. More to the point, a Modern home can help you live more "modernly," whatever that represents to you.

The iPhone, obviously, isn't a building, but all Apple software, hardware and packaging are painstakingly designed with what I'd call aspirational purpose. Their architecture (both informational and structural) is dedicated to accommodating and facilitating our needs, opposed to mitigating technical limitations. They seek to create a specific experience of unlimited possibility for the user.

More and more, we live inside software and hardware, floating high above the 0's and 1's as plush, logical graphic user interfaces allow us to engage in tasks of astonishing complexity just by pointing, clicking or clacking. We don't have to worry about the messy root level, thus the electronic tool becomes an extension and facilitator of our non-electronic lives.

So this means that appearance and environment matter beyond simple visual attraction or status significance. The more harmonious the decor of a device, the more inviting its floor plan, the more we feel engaged and capable, the more "invited" we feel to live a certain type of life within its virtual walls, maybe even a life we can only sense in some vague fashion.

And here's how I think the iPhone could really enhance our lives--in the yet to be discovered, soon to be indispensable, everyday activities...like the search, playlists, maps and blogging we enjoy today. (Assuming, of course, it works as advertised.)

The device sets the table by packaging essential pre-existing technologies (mp3/video player, entertainment database, full Internet connection, cellular phone, PDA) in a physically beautiful, friendly device. The special sauce is the multi-touch software which facilitates a virtually unlimited number of connections between these applications.

Said another way: It gives you the power to do things you never knew you wanted to do. In fact, it makes doing these things effortless and normal. And that's the true genius of prior Apple revolutions like the Mac or the iPod. They recognize that our experience matters, in fact, they cater to it shamelessly, because they know what entices or repels. We're either going to engage with the gizmo or not.

Sure, the iPhone won't help us make these innovative jumps without fantastic engineering and production. But all the technology in the world won't matter unless we, the users, are invited to open the door, kick our shoes off and stay awhile.

Don't sell me a story. Tell me one instead.

2007-01-01T12:05:00.000-08:00

My wife and I spent New Year's Eve with some close friends. As Dick Clark narrated the approach of midnight (I was simultaneously impressed and disheartened by the obvious effects of his stroke), we tried a game called "Taboo." To play, you make teams of two people (we did boys vs. girls) who take turns giving each other clues to guess "secret words."

The hook of the game is the each word comes with a list of taboo terms--using those to give clues causes you to lose points. For example, to help your partner guess "Big BirdÂ®" you can't say Sesame StreetÂ®, MuppetÂ®, television, yellow or feathers. So you might say, "An avian friend of Oscar the Grouch."

To put it bluntly, the girls cleaned our clock. My wife simply gave more linguistically potent clues. Our friend, who writes fiction, actually told stories about each word, which led directly to the right answer. What's more, she wove a story from word to word, building each subsequent word on the last one. Stuck with MadLibs style clues and pop culture references, we boys couldn't compete with that.

Why is this interesting in a business sense? It's a powerful reminder that communications become more effective when we make situations and motivations more human and relevant. And nothing facilitates this process like a story.

As a copywriter, I've learned that I can better communicate the logic behind concepts by setting the communication context with a brief story. It puts people "into" the situation and allows them to think like the intended recipient of our banners, web pages, direct mail, advertisements, etc. It also helps to close the gap between presenter and audience.

The tactic has application beyond mere selling. A company from Australia called Antedote uses storytelling and narrative to help companies identify and solve business problems for much the same reasons. When people tell a story about their supply chain, for example, the true nature of the situation or dynamic becomes clear--without a conscious effort to reveal it.

This idea also extends to companies and their branding. What's your story? Who's the likely reader? And is it based somewhere in fact? The best fiction (generally) reminds us of real-life experiences. Your company's message should do the same. Otherwise, you'll end up with a promise or premise that just doesn't connect, no matter how pretty and clever it might be.

So, the next time you have to present some data or provide a convincing argument, try using a story. My guess is that it'll work quite well. At the very least, you'll provide your audience some relief from the mental desert of bullet points and bar graphs.

What companies can learn from Plug One and Plug Two.

2006-11-11T17:18:00.000-08:00

I'm not really into hip hop much anymore. But last night I listened to De La Soul's Grind Date. And it got me thinking about how different they were when their first album came out in '89. How everyone thought they were sell outs, hippies or Buppie dilettantes--or worse.

But they risked ridicule and failure to pursue their artistic vision. And over the years they never sold out. They didn't go gangsta. They never drank Cristal or wore linen in their videos. They didn't bring on a hot white girl. They just stayed De La. And it's worked.

15 years later, their music and rhymes sound different. But it's still the same daring and integrity to do what they think it right.

I think many companies could take a lesson from this focus and dedication to a powerful, honest idea.

Sure, you need to adapt to changing times, technologies and customers. But there's a big difference between doing that and trying to be what you're not. The core of what you're about needs to be integral and integrated into everything you do. I believe that can guide how you adapt and evolve.

Positive examples that come to mind:
G.E. (a culture of perfection and innovation)
Method Cleaning Products (efficient and chemically friendly)
The Holy Brand Trinity (Nike, Apple and Target)
Charles Schwab (respect and listening)
McDonald's (they've added healthier foods w/out losing their status as "fun place to eat")

Negative examples that pop up:
Cell Phone Companies (utilities trying to be entertainment companies that still treat customers like utilities)
Gateway (are they a computer company or an electronics company? do you even care?)
Coach (classic, quality leather goods turned transitory style groupie)
Charles Schwab (before the new branding campaign, when they tried to become another Merrill Lynch)
G.M. brands like Buick/Pontiac (their orignal message has been lost forever, I think)

You can argue that the second list includes viable businesses, and it does. But in today's fragmented, porous communications environment, it's nearly impossible to prop up a false message. Sooner or later the truth comes out, so why not start there and save yourself all that trouble?

When the marketers take over the asylum.

2006-10-10T16:38:00.000-07:00

These days, marketers and marketing simultaneously share the business spotlight and act as universal scourge for all that ails our consumer culture.

Yet in our age of specialization--think long snapper or food stylist--it only seems normal that this business function would become it's own special domain. (That it's come to dominate some industries and companies provides a much larger story, but that's another post.)

That said, I find something extremely relevant the notion that pure marketing without connection to the service or product being, well, "marketed," signifies a dangerous mbalance that can really mess up your business plan.

A smart man named John Gruber posted about this very topic last week. He lists his objections to Adobe naming its new photographic app Lightroom "Photoshop Lightroom". Aside from semantic issues, he identifies this problem:

Calling Lightroom “Photoshop Lightroom” is another sign of this: it’s marketing for the sake of marketing itself, as opposed to marketing that serves and respects the actual products. Any great company must be run by people who both understand and love the products the company creates; a car company needs to be run by car people; a movie studio by movie people; and a software company by software people. This is why so many great companies fade away after their founding generation retires: the companies are taken over by “sales and marketing” people.

I agree with him, as I also do with his assertion that good marketing rings true. As I've babbled too many times to mention, your company's message has to be based in truth, otherwise people will eventually wise up and abandon you. Or worse, they'll actively despise you.

Does this mean that pure marketers don't have a place in business? Not at all. They just need to believe in and understand their product or service on a gut level. Just going through motions will result in vapid, self-centered blah-blah-blah.

Would you put that in a paper bag, please?

2006-10-01T11:32:00.000-07:00

[Skip to paragraph six if you don't have time for a stylistic preamble...]

Over 20 years ago back in high school, I used to love J. Crew. Part of it was the whole preppie thing (although I'd gone toward the whole Ska schtick in style), part of it was the great cotton, part of it was the crazy striped shorts they sold. Damn, we all loved those shorts.

Anyway, I got into college, developed different tastes and J. Crew remained the same. Out of school and into the work force I discovered (in order) baggy, pleated pants, slightly less baggy pleated pants, baggy plain front pants, then slimmer plain front pants. (Oh yeah, cuffs were de rigeur back in the 90's but we too parted ways.)

I also discovered the "tailored" dress shirt (read "Euro style") and developed a distaste for chinos. I'm not a wide guy, and Crew's dress shirts were like tents on me. And khakis just didn't have the style I wanted...or something. Either way, these tastes drove me and J. Crew even farther apart.

But times change, and I got older. Nowadays, most of the time I wear Levi's 501s and dress shirts with a blazer. It's the new corporate creative uniform in my town. (The Levi's may not be, but I refuse to pay $200+ for a pair of goofy, jacked up "luxury" jeans--Citizens for Humanity indeed. This whole "reasonable" thing, however, becomes really hard when it comes to shoes.)

I try to buy quality clothing b/c it needs to last a long time. And as I get a little older, the less I want or need to look hip. So after reading that J. Crew had great quality denim, I checked it out, eventually buying a pair of sale jeans online. It has been a very positive shopping experience.*

[This is paragraph six]
To start with, the website is super easy to use. But we should expect that. Then my jeans arrived in the mail, in a paper envelope (photo above) that has a wonderfully crisp, crinkly texture and says "recycle me" at the same time. (I can't say enought about that darn package--I found myself holding it for far longer than necessary just to hear the crinkly sound.) In fact, the only plastic in the whole experience was the bag holding the jeans, but it too is recycleable.

The fabric of the jeans felt substantial. The buttons are substantial. And they've changed their tags a bit to look more simple and retro. It gives the whole thing an authentic, quality feel. You may be laughing at me (I kinda am as I type this) but I know, and every person in business worth his or her salt knows, that these intangible, seemingly unimportant details add up to build a sense of satisfaction that creates loyal customers. (Apple's packaging is actually nicer than many products out there.)

So, the basic part has been achieved: I like my new jeans and have a newfound interest in J. Crew's products. But it hasn't stopped there. The company also has the post-sale thing locked:

--• Two weeks after my purchase I received a "welcome offer" for free shipping. I didn't buy anything, though.
--• A month later they sent me another free shipping offer, but I think it's a basic seasonal thing.
--• Two weeks ago they really got me: A $25 gift card with an announcement of a store opening in Walnut Creek. And this time, they got me. I'll probably end up spending over $100, which will be $75 they otherwise wouldn't receive.

Now, if you're really a clothes person, you'd probably only buy some very selected items from a mass merchandiser like this. And I'm cool with that. But I'm definitely not a heavy-duty clothes person, so when I can find quality items that have a unique and/or timely classic look, I'm happy. And when a retailer provides a positive, non-intrusive, value-based experience I'm definitely interested.

What positive shopping experiences have you enjoyed lately?

* True, shopping is hardly an important activity compared with spending time with loved ones or giving back to the community. But purchasing is a necessity, and there are many sellers, so the experience should be as positive (or painless if you prefer) as possible.

It's about much more than the next hip marketing tactic.

2006-09-01T14:26:00.000-07:00

I work in the communications department of a large corporation. Mostly, I get paid to make words and images tell an interesting story. I also help other people in our company figure out different ways to tell these stories. It's a pretty nice gig.

Even better, marketing communications has changed drastically in the past three or four years, so I'm kinda in the middle of this transition from one-way comms (the "goose liver pate" method) to the multi-way comms (the "free-range beef" method).

Change is generally good. It keeps people like me employed. Change is also always interesting. But it's almost always difficult. Especially for large corporations, and doubly so for communications departments in large corporations--for a bunch of Harvard Business School reasons I can't name precisely but can sense like a cat does water.

So, I often find myself working on projects in which we're trying to do the right thing but just can't quite figure out how, or why it's such a good idea in the first place. It's more complicated than just a lack of knowledge about "Web 2.0" or social networking. (Note: My company has a great advertising campaign. But making that campaign live inside and out of the company is the real challenge.)

I think it comes down to this: Companies need to make a dramatic shift in how they view themselves. Are they confident among their competitors and open to their customers? Or are they running scared on both fronts? Until they move more toward the former, they won't be able to embrace this new "free-range beef" reality, this whole Web 2./Social Networking/Cluetrain thing.

Why? Because to do that you've got to be comfortable with not having control. You've got to have an honest, interesting story that can stand up to and even thrive on criticism and inexact retellings. Because it will happen, whether you like it or not.

You've also got to really want to talk to your customers, even if they don't really want to talk to you.*

Here are some random places I stumbled across today where people smarter than me talk about this phenomenon:

Three Minds
Logic + Emotion

And of course, The Cluetrain.

*Cluetrain states "all markets are conversations," and they're right in the aggregate. But on the micro level, I don't think many people actually want to have an ongoing dialogue with their insurance broker or the company that makes their running shoes. I sure don't. However, I do want to be heard, and I want those companies to offer products that make sense for my situation. One of the ways they can do that is by asking me my opinion, which is fine, but quite a bit different than having a conversation.

Agency.com forgot that the camera doesn't lie.

2006-08-04T18:10:00.000-07:00

The Agency.com Subway pitch video has made the rounds of all the ad blogs. I had hoped it was a clever farce, but unfortunately I haven't read anything indicating that.

Bypassing the obvious targets for derision (the ECD with PermaStubble® and cammo NY Yankees hat, the CD who compares herself to Grace Kelly and Rodney Dangerfield, the New Biz Guy who enacts his wet dream of snapping his fingers to make creatives come running, the "If we roll we roll big" comment, the hipster senior AD who talks vaguely about Subway's "potential" as if they haven't already proven themselves a viable business...the list could go on and on) it struck me that the aggressive lameness of the video--which was supposed to be and is "viral" in the sense the it's getting traded around and contains the microbes of agency ignorance--masked the real problem with it. And that was the mindset it so obviously revealed.

All the self-congratulatory lame-ass agency bullsh*t, and apparent time-bubble they live in aside, I don't think it was such a bad idea to pitch with this type of video. It's a great way to peel back the onion a bit and show how a shop works, how they think. And basically, that's all an agency has--the work they produce and the relationships they create.

Unfortunately, what Agency.com produced is so completely derivative of the reality TV genre, and as a group they are so painfully self-aware and disingenuous, that I finished watching the video without a single shred of credible evidence that they would bring anything unique to Subway. (They even had the audacity to imply that Subway "needed" their help, a big no-no.) Nor did I get a sense of who they are as people, other than to think that they're overconfident and will never really tell me the truth.

More importantly, if I'm Subway's VP of Advertising and am trying to decide who gets my multi-million-dollar online ad buy, I want to feel confident my agency knows something about my brand and cares about my success. Agency.com didn't show me that at all, not a single customer insight or example of how they understand what Subway's about. The only thing they achieved with any effectiveness was to indicate what's their top priority--and it's themselves.

I really do hope it's a clever "meta" spoof or satire. I really, really do.

Mayan Ruin Cage Match: Ek-Balaam vs. Chitchen Itza

2006-05-31T14:35:00.000-07:00

While still in Valladolid (baya doLEED), we took a late morning-early afternoon and went to Ek-Balaam, about 30 miles away. A lessor known Maya city, it doesn´t receive the same hype and word of mouth it deserves, and as a result, offers a better touristic experience.

Chitchen Itza (cheeCHEN eetSAH), on the other hand is the Taj Mahal of Mayan cities. It´s part of the Cancun weekday trip list and almost everyone I know whose heard of the Yucatan knows Chitzen. And with good reason, because it definitely knocks your socks off in size, variety and infrastructure. There´s food, lockers, a scale model and legions of guides who make the tour all the more interesting, even though truth be told, most of what we know about Maya culture is based on supposition and reading of gliphs. A Spanish priest burned hundreds of Mayan history books back in the 17th century, thereby saving Catholism from Who Knows What and depriving future societies with valuable knowledge about this amazing culture.

Ek-Balaam, on the other hand, has fewer buildings restored and minimal foot traffic (a guide said they get 400 visitors a day in high season--they must get that per hour at Chitchen), and so you can actually walk on the ruins to get a personal sense of the size and shape. We climbed the talest pyramid, which at over 100 feet in height(10 stories tall) makes for a tough trip up and an amazing view from the top. We could see several telltale green lumps nearby indicating ruins yet uncovered, and our view reached all the way south to Coba, another important ruin site. A recently discovered stucco, sculptured mural was also on display. 20 feet high, as smooth as the day it was finished, it portrays a monster´s mouth, the entry point to the underworld.

(Keep in mind that Ek-Balaam was built around the time of Christ through the appearance of Mohammed (the religious connection a coincidence I´m sure), so while most cultures were earthbound and living in semi-squalor--double that if you put Europe into the equation--the Maya were building 10-story structures, administering cities of over 50,000 people, and trading up and down what is now Central America. All without metal tools, the wheel and rivers to facilitate trade and building. Oh, and also, they discovered the zero and kept a calendar that looked back and ahead something like 5,000 years.

What shocked us the most about EB was how little had been done to really uncover the site and make it more interesting for tourists. In the US, I´m sure it would have a theme park by now, so it´s a good news/bad news situation. While you lose a deeper sense of the city, you gain in calm and freedom to climb around.

Chitchen Itza, on the other hand, is a tourist factory. But even with the sunburned crowds from Cancun and the constant hawking from the Mexican Souvenir Mafia, the sheer size, architectural skill and artistic/religious fervor make it stand out. Two quick facts before I go:

1. The walls today are rough-cut limestone, but in Mayan times they were covered by stucco and painted bright colors, much like the Romanesque and Gothic cathedrals in Europe.

2. A building called the Observatory contains startling mathematical data. According to our guide, the foundation of the topmost portion face exactly north/south and east/west. What´s more, the windows in the top turret track the arc of certain stars in the sky. For example, one follows Venus, with the angle formed by the outer and inner frames of the window giving the stars exact position. Hard to explain in writing, all the same, they knew their astromomy and their math.

Nothing more to add to this, other than to say that if you get to the Yucatan take the time to check out some ruins. I always find it reassuring, humbling and sobering to realize that past civilizations made great strides in understand our physical universe, and developed well functioning systems of explaining the spiritual side of the equation. Makes me think that we´re not that unique, but instead part of a long, gradual progression toward higher development.

Next up, Merida, an absolutely fantastic city that used to be know as "Paris of the West".

Tropical air, Mayan architecture, spicy sausage.

2006-05-25T16:18:00.000-07:00

"We're in Mexico. Nothing makes sense."

So said the pouty, tall, 20+ brunette behind us in response to her mother's frustration with the speed of the Customs line.

I almost turned around and asked her what, if anything at her age, she had experienced as background or basis for this blanket dismissal of an entire country. But then I realized that I was tired, she was bitchy, and it wasn't worth it. I recounted the exchange to my wife, who replied "Those are the people we plan to get away from." As usual, she was right.

We arrived in Cancun two days ago in a torrential downpour. One of those heavy, warm tropical rains with huge, soft droplets coming down in sheets. The streets flooded, naturally, and after waiting calmly in the local bus station (we'd sidestepped the airport tourist scrum and taken the local shuttle), we hopscotched and waded our way to a nearby hotel to spend the night. Four amazing tacos later, I fell asleep.

Wednesday we got up early and took a local bus to Valladolid, a smallish town near the Mayan ruins of Chichen Itza. The local or second class busses are great. With anthopoligical precision, our bus driver deduced I was from the US (What was it? The lack of Spanish? Pale skin?) and proceeded to tell us he spoke English and French. Actually, he spoke about three phrases in each, but it was enough to laugh a little and start the trip off right.

It's hard to describe the tropical air. "Heavy" is close, but it's also soft, none of the hard edges of dry heat. Even though I miss feeling completely dry, the humidity just makes things so much more relaxed. As we cruised through the outskirts of Cancun, I could see the weather's influence on the way of life--a kind of benevolent disorder mixed with a public life lived on the sidewalk. Businesses front (sp) the street. You hang out in front of them to take care of your transaction, because, I guess, it's never cold, only wet, and only then for a short while.

As we cruised along, warm, moist wind streaming through the windows, I noticed a to-go beer stand complete with bars to keep the drunks out, a frame shop, a pre-school called the "Instituto Rockefeller", a plastic bag store and a roadside supplement stand touting increased sexual energy pills. Every six blocks or so, we'd pull over to pick up a few more passengers, and our driver would ask them their destination and then calculate some sort of tarif. One very poor-looking mother/daughter couple got by with just a few pesos. One very stinky "road hard, put away wet" looking guy didn't have the complete fare, so the driver tossed in the difference.

The langor or torpor got to me and I dozed off as we bumped our way through several small towns, always picking up and dropping off. Three hours later we arrived at Valladolid, where our driver dropped us off with a "Nice to meet you." A world of difference from even our srubby section of Cancun. The Spanish built this town, so the core is full of small one-way streets and buildings of all colors pushing their way on to the single-file sidewalks. Music coming from everywhere, short, stocky locals eating, laughing, talking and conducting business. Although the local stores lack in variety and creativity, they sure are numerous. Hard to imagine the local populace can sustain so many. But I guess they do.

Valladolid is "away from there". It's far more unAmerican than Sayulita, the Pacific-side surf town we love so much. Compared to Valladolid, Sayulita is Gringoville. Which neither good or bad. But a nice change for us.

Anyway, we've had some decent meals and enjoyed walking around this little, peppy town. Today we also went to a less visited but impressive set of Mayan ruins called Ek-Balaam, a description of which I'll save for another day. I'll probably sample some more of the local, cinnamon flavored sausgage tonight, then we're off to Chitchen Itza tomorrow. After that, Merida.

Flying High with Omaha

2006-05-25T15:59:00.000-07:00

On my way to 11 days on the Yucatan Penninsula, I stirred from my reading to notice an infomercial on United's in-flight network for Omaha. Yes, Omaha. I found it a bit strange; for one thing, I hadn't thought of the city as meriting advertising (sorry for the Left Coast chauvinism folks), but even more to the point, I hadn't imagined that they would be touting their city in the first place. Do municipalities actually recruit potential citizens? I guess so.

And this effort was particularly sophisticated, airing on a Denvir to Cancun flight, it contained some tight editing, nice visuals, and an impressive string of statistics and rankings showing Omaha as an up-and-coming player, so to speak. The campaign continued in the on-flight magazine, Horizons or Lattitudes or something, and they have a vanity URL for the whole effort, which I failed to jot down.

I see this as a way of "moving to the head of the demand chain," a concept I picked up from a fascinating post on Sviokla's Context (and one I'll be messing around with for the next few months). Actually, it's really extending the demand chain, something at which broadcast, whether public or contained, can really excel. There you are, just sitting there eating pretzels waiting for the captain to let you get up to go to the bathroom, and a nice looking little ad comes up for Omaha. Since you're on a plane, you don't have Tivo, so you watch. And just like that, the idea gets planted. You may mention it to a friend, blog about it, or visit the web site. To me, that's new marketing.

Anyway, it seems to me that this is a harbringer for future like efforts, now that the urban centers aren't necessary to conduct big-time business and most citites continue to give their inhabitants a raw deal when it comes to the infrastructure, schools and quality of life you get for paying hith taxes and dealing with crime.

I wouldn't consider Omaha on purpose, but if I were from the Midwest or less Left Coast centric, I just might. And that't the power of distributing a story.

Cutting to the chase and the sale.

2006-04-24T21:41:00.000-07:00

There's a lot of talk out there in marketinggeek land about changing the demand chain and how the Internet has splintered communications and opened up the flow of information. All of that is true. But I'm always jazzed when I see it proved to me directly.

I recently started experimenting with wet shaving, you know, double-edged razor, brush, shaving cream in a jar instead of a can. We're talking about a $200 investment in all the various equipment. That part isn't so interesting. The story's in how I got there.

Sifting through Gapingvoid one day, something I have less time for lately, I stumbled upon Shaveblog, an informative and hilarious chronicle of wet shaving written by Corey Greenberg, an editor for NBC TV. He's a clever guy, and his description of wet shaving's advantages (no razor burn, better shave, quality experience, cool accoutrements, etc.) had me willing to give it a try. (I'm not alone; Greenburg's appearance on The Today Show, his blog and other aficionados have caused a gold rush on creams, razors, brushes, etc.)

So how did I end up dropping the $200? Through Corey's recommendations, mostly. He pointed me to Classic Shaving for a Merkur razor and blades and Nancy Boy for shaving cream (more on that interesting company in a later post). When I had problems finding a Schick Injector as a training razor, I turned to the messageboard Badger & Blade, where a helpful guy named Jerry sold me an 1940's Schick Eversharp for half of what I would have paid on eBay.

As fascinating as my shaving habits are, have you kept your mind on the key point here? All that demand chain/Internet stuff? Here's the deal: I changed my behavior (and a basic part of my personal grooming to boot) and spent over $200 without the help or involvement of a major brand or store. In fact, I can guarantee you I never would have tried wet shaving without Gapingvoid, Shaveblog, Classic Shaving, Nancy Boy, Badger & Blade or eBay.

You can't even find or buy quality double-edged razors, brushes and cream where most of us men buy our Gillette Mach 12 and gel in a can. Not a chance. They don't offer them. (Although Target has begun to offer Proraso shaving cream, an Italian wet shaving stalwart. And I bet it's due to shaving blogs and message boards and the resulting rise in demand for wet shaving products.)

So this is the new deal. This is how people learn, experiment, connect and buy. And it's got very little, if anything, with an ad you saw by accident on TV, in a magazine or a direct mail package or a banner. (Sure, Greenburg popped some serious exposure on The Today Show, but that's not an ad.)

It's based on shared experience you can trust of a superior way to shave. Some company isn't selling you some ridiculous, bulbous plastic monstrosity that probably doesn't work any better than their last model. Companies are producing quality products, and real people (unpaid promoters) are telling you where to get them.

Classic Shaving, Merkur, Nancy Boy and others are out ahead of the monsters of shaving products. They're the ones on the edge of the curve, by being behind the times. I think that's pretty damn exciting.

Super Bowl ads not so supa dupa.

2006-02-14T09:44:00.000-08:00

Put this in your "Gee, that's a surprise...just kidding" file.

Turns out that many of the $2.5MM spots went at a discount, as Ad Age reports:

It has become a tough sell, and never more so than in 2005, as the bench of go-to Super Bowl advertisers thins and networks try to pump up prices. This year marketers snapped up last-minute ads at 40% discounts as ABC scrambled to sell a number of spots going into the weekend. Three-and-a-half minutes of advertising -- including at least two spots sold over the weekend -- went to ABCÂ’s corporate siblings, making the Walt Disney Co. the second-biggest advertiser in the game.

Worse, the online magazine reports that five advertisers repurposed creative instead of shooting new spots just for the game. Only one company did that last year.

And the meaning of all this? I think it's pretty clear. Ads are too expensive to buy and produce relative to their effectiveness, so prices need to come down.

For large, omnipresent brands like Budweiser this poses a real problem: What to do when you're an established part of the media landscape? No one switches to Bud because of their ads, but everyone would notice if they stopped advertising. I don't have an answer for that one.

You'd have to talk to a knowledgeable media person to be sure, but I imagine that most ad space is way overvalued--if you believe like I do that they're just one, shrinking part of the multi-faceted marketing approach companies need to connect with people in a helpful, meaningful way.

The inmates have become the asylum's board of directors. We don't realize it yet, but it's true. (Interesting quote from P&G's Lafley on this general idea from Andy Lark at BrandShift.)

Here's the AdAge article if you want to read more. It requires a login.

A blog is like a Chia Pet.

2006-02-08T07:51:00.000-08:00

As you can see, I haven't posted much the last six months. It's gotten so bad a close friend literally crapped on my blog. Another one compared Nonstop Express to Studio 54, but without the drugs, celebrities and wanton sex.

What can I say? They're right. Other things have become more important and time consuming. And I must admit that the advertising/marketing focus that developed for this blog often stymies me; that stuff isn't really so interesting compared to the millions of other things I'm unqualified to write about, and I create/analyze advertising/marketing for a living.

Whatever. I'm going to post more, if only to continue my scolding of Citibank. And maybe, just maybe, people will start to visit again.

And Merry Christmas to you, too, Citibank

2005-12-28T19:01:00.000-08:00

Gosh, I just love the smell of Spam in the morning. Check out what I arrived in my email box on December 25, 2005:

Let CitiMortgage make your holiday planning a bit easier this year with great options to pay for your holiday expenses and important home ownership information.

Whether you're traveling or staying in town this holiday season, your home will be waiting.

In this issue of eNews...(It continues in the same vein for several paragraphs, but I'll spare you that)

So, what's so special about this?

The timing, dude, the timing. Not only was it a national holiday, it was a Sunday.* That's like the marketing no-no double-whammy.

And the content. I just refied with them a few months ago, so why would I want a new mortgage?** Stupid. And as one who has written emails like this, a big waste of many people's professional time.

Plus, this just fits right in with my general impression of Citibank--that of a rather rapacious company hiding behind a very clever, ultimately dishonest ad campaign.*** If I didn't like them before, I sure don't now.

Gotta remember to do the walk the walk/talk the talk thing. Otherwise you end up looking like that buddy you had in high school who asked your ex-girlfriend out on a date before you'd stopped moping and listening to Cure songs.

(*Leaving the whole religious signficance thing aside for a moment. Sunday is still generally considered the one day of the week where you get to do very little and don't receive any junk mail.)

(**Not by choice, I might add. My loan originator sold the mortgage off.)

(***Okay, okay, this is a rather unresearched claim. But tell me, does it not ring true for you?)

The customer is king. No, really, she is.

2005-12-07T20:26:00.000-08:00

I had the good fortune today to view a 60-minute video of Fred Reichheld from Bain and Company.

His rap is fairly simple and completely brilliant. Passionate and loyal employees engender passionate and loyal customers, and companies that have both grow and prosper.

The key to passionate and loyal employees is to compensate them for creating passionate and loyal customers. The key to creating passionate and loyal customers is to make them feel wanted, important and unique by following the Golden Rule. He offers a surprisingly simple way to achieve this goal: Ask a few questions and act on the answers.

It's a far more sophisticated and developed take on something I wrote about awhile back. Namely that marketing upsupported by an excellent customer experience is just so much blah-blah-blah. And that blah-blah-blah, when customers finally uncover it, can take your business down the tubes.

What I find so interesting about this approach is its counterintuitive aspect. Now, you might not think it so, but many hard-core business folks concentrate solely on profits, which can lead to short-term thinking, customer gauging and the type of arrogance I've experienced at companies like cell phone networks, banks, cable providers and fast food restaurants.

To many of us, treating the people who ultimately pay your salary with respect, and doing your best to provide services and products they want, seems like common sense. I guess it is. At least according to the data Mr. Reichheld uses to make his point.

This theory isn't an aberration, a case of high-powered, Harvard-Business-School-educated consultant with a wacky idea. It follows the movement of today's business environment. Nearly unlimited choice means the customer runs the show. Forget that and your particular show might be soon over.

Is that person being nice or just getting paid?

2005-10-04T17:21:00.000-07:00

Interesting article on AdAge about Buzz marketing and the legality or lack thereof.

What I find telling is that the article focuses only on the legality of the thing:

As marketers more frequently look to recruit consumers brand agents to spread goodwill for brands, industry attorneys view buzz marketing as a likely area of regulatory involvement, especially around the issue of compensating people to participate in buzz programs when they fail to disclose their connections to marketers and agencies.

No mention about the other Purple Elephant crashing the lawn party: the honesty of staging opinion, events and "random" social interactions to influence purchases.

Call me a wacky Left Coaster, but the fact that companies pay actors to imitate friends discussing hot new music on the street pisses me off. If bloggers or pundits want to dish products while disclosing their affiliation with the producers, that's fine. I'll take their thoughts with two huge grains of salt. (I do draw the line at governmental spokespeople, but that's another topic.)

But when advertisers try to crack the social fabric with this kind of fake reality, they've crossed the dividing line. If you can't trust non-transactional social interactions to be unpaid, unscripted and unpurchased, our little, happy consumer world becomes truly bogus. It reaches the status of simulacra, a la Baudrillard. And that's no small event.

Advertising isn't real (even if large parts of the corporate population worship at its feet), and most folks with half a brain know it. Honest marketing is contained in a recognizable context--we can expect to be sold and act accordingly. This new buzz garbage deserves the trash bin.

Which comes first, the market or the ad?

2005-07-24T20:59:00.000-07:00

Chris Meserole of Democratic Vista emailed me a few weeks ago. (The excitement of receiving mail from a reader is the subject of another post, to be sure.)

Before he moved on to more important, meaningful things, like writing his thesis at Harvard, he worked in marketing a company in LA that did entertainment and brand management. Mostly film and music related, but they also managed companies like Pony. And so he posed this question:

One of the things I used to wonder about then was the distinction between marketing and advertising -- or put differently, where the line was between resolving an inevitable gap between producer and consumer on the one hand and creating an artificial demand on the other.

Do you ever think in those terms? If so, how to do you dinstinguish them?

To start, advertising is a subset of marketing in general. Most ad agencies would have you believe otherwise, but what they do is just part of the puzzle, along with promotion, direct mktg, sales, etc.

The "inevitable gap" Chris mentions is rapidly shrinking today, but back when the traditional model of marketing was still valid, ads were pretty much it. You ran them on TV and in print, you created demand in your product, you got better shelf placement, you made money, and you bought more ads. Agencies got paid 15% of your media buy, and everyone got rich.

Today, that system is changing. Many people like to proclaim with much gravitas that advertising is "dead." Certainly, the old routine is broken. With 9 bazillion channels and Tivo, TV doesn't guarantee reach anymore and people read fewer magazines and newspapers (no stats there, just a guess). Plus, folks today have become quite skilled at avoiding ads. They may enjoy watching them, but I doubt those commercials generate much in real sales. It's become subpar entertainment.

So the gap needs to be closed in other ways and creating demand has transformed into finding ways to meet desires people don't even know they have. (Does anyone really believe that market research told Apple that millions of people wanted a stylish, easy to use, mp3 fashion accessory? I think not.)

I believe what Seth Godin says, that today business IS marketing. Everything a company does, from designing products to training customer service staff to sending out bill statements plays an increasingly important role in creating or sustaining a relationship with people who become or remain customers.

}}} You close the gap by giving the customer ways to get closer to your company, because otherwise, she will go elsewhere...quietly if she's nice, but often the reverse is the case.

}}} And you "create demand" by focusing on needs, by producing something useful or relevant that stands out in the crowd of all the other smart people with the same idea.

In the Western nations, the majority of people have what they need (again, thanks Seth), but they are obsessed with what they want. To rationalize our decisions, we change those desires into necessities, and the consumer marketplace acts like a co-dependent spouse, "Go ahead, buy that 450-horsepower Ford Stomper. You need all that muscle to drive the kids to the multiplex. In fact, you deserve it."

In my opinion, this kind of crap will soon see its last day, because I think people will eventually get pissed when they realize how sick the game is and role they've played. Will they buy less stuff? Probably not. But they will start to look for companies that tell the truth about what they sell. That's the value of all the two-way communication going on today in blogs, podcasts and such.

So marketing is becoming the big kahuna in the business world. And advertising is changing itself to stay employed, slowly trying to sneak into domains they once wouldn't have touched with a ten foot pole, like direct mail, online ads and even stupid fake blogs.

What's truly interesting about this phenomena is how many companies obviously haven't made the adjustment. Just read the ad press for a few days and your jaw will drop at the sums of cash still being spent for 30-second spots the fewer and fewer people will ever see, much less pay attention to. Amazon recently did a very smart thing by taking their ad budget and putting it toward free shipping. I read somewhere that the move is costing them revenue, but conceptionally it's right on the money.

I used to get bummed out that I never had the cojones to try to work in general advertising. Turns out my self-doubt will probably keep me employed for years to come.

Watch what you say but mind what you do.

2005-06-29T22:10:00.000-07:00

"Je boxe avec les mots..."
--Arsenik

"Occasionnellement pourtant mon bic se bat avec l'art subtil du prose combat..."
--Mc Solaar

"J'ai mis les mots au tapin pour la sensation au trottoir des syllabes, prostitué la diction."
--IAM

"Got a freaky, freaky, freaky-freaky flow...control the mic like Fidel Castro."
--Jeru

Mister Coe over at ~~PDF~~PDG posted this comment to my last post:

I think it's just a phase that you hit sometimes - you need to work through the pain...
It's all just words - and they are perhaps the most overvalued of communication, philosophical, religious, political etc. etc. devices. I think that there's a real place for corporate blagging, podcats and wookies - we're just too far ahead of the curve still...

I think he may have hit on something really important here marketing-wise aside from the usual Zen-tinged wisdom lurking behind most of his utterings: We're so damn obsessed with our words we forget that most everything counts for more.

Customer experience is key. The delicious smell of new electronics when you open the box. The smile you receive when you enter a restaurant. The fact that when a company says they give a shit they really prove it by walking the talk, by following through after you've plunked down your 100 samoleons and become a customer.

There's a wise saying that relates to most spiritual endeavors:
You can't think your way into right action. You must act your way into right thinking.

Actions speak louder than words. It's the problem with most advertising and PR. It's the disconnect between blogs and the real world.

Yeah, words can lead to actions of the best and worst sort, but if words are all you've got...well then you're missing more than half of the equation.

Clicking the day away

2005-06-22T16:46:00.000-07:00

I spent a very unproductive day at work, sifting through various blogs and getting willfully sidetracked by them. See, I've been writing about corporate blogging for about 6 weeks now, leading up to a presentation, and I think my brain is fried on the whole topic. I find myself suddenly thinking, "Hmm. This whole blogging thing is a fad. It won't mean diddly-squat to most businesses." Then I shiver with the fear of turning out to be like the guy who pegged the worldwide computer market at 5.

The main issue that turns over and over in my mind is how we have absolutely too much frickin' information at our disposal. It's insane. NYT. Salon. Blogs out the youknowwhat. Global news. Micro news. Vblogs. Email. Books. Podcasts. Newsletters. PDF manifestos. Tivo. It makes we want to scream à la James Brown. (Without the jump back and kiss myself part.)

Then I look down at Market Street from my 11-story window to watch the busses, people, cars and bikes go by, and I realize that all this crap really doesn't matter that much. That you can't stuff 9 bazillion books into your head. That whatever happens to the Internet, really interesting people will still be out there publishing their thoughts and photos for all to see. That I'm incredibly lucky to have a job that allows me to even ponder all this shit at all.

Anyway, I'm off to spincycle.

Paper aggregators or cheap sales tools...or both?

2005-06-21T14:30:00.000-07:00

An old article from Salon that disses those new shopping mags like Lucky and Cargo.

That was my first take on them, too. You know, full of superior consumer self-knowledge and whatnot. In a new spin on "authentic snobbery," the author snidely asks, "Why spend years building a personal aesthetic when you can just buy one?" She hates the mags b/c they allow people to buy cool things w/out having to search all over them. Imagine that! Now the ubercool are pissed b/c it's getting harder and harder to be...um...a snobby ubercoolster. Whatever.

Anyway, after reading and thinking about aggregators a little while, it dawned me (duh!) that these mags are just that. And what's the difference between them and Gizmodo, when you really think about it?

Personally, I think this is one of the things to get in on right now. There's so much crap to read/buy/learn/consume online that people are going to want endorsed-aggregators. I mean, if Sergey Brin said a certain coffee machine was cool, wouldn't you give it a second look?

Our Gross Domestic Bullshit Product keeps on growing

2005-06-01T16:58:00.000-07:00

I wish I had a Postmodernism Generator back in college. It would have helped appease my lit profs and saved me some sleepless nights.

I'm sure the Wacky Left and the Idiot Right have these as well. Just go to some of the edge political blogs for proof.

Today, some overlycaffeinated guy in the comments of this post on Buzzmachine called France a "nation of backstabbing whores". Yeah, sure, they're irritating at times and crappy at large scale military campaigns, but really now.

Speaking of whores, lately, I've taken to watching the O'Reilly Report while I sweat my ass off on the elliptic. He must have an enormous bullshit machine--no way one single man could generate all that himself.

For some fun O'Reilly Antispin®, visit Newshounds.
(Thanks to Chris for the link.)

So THAT'S how they do it!

2005-05-27T09:48:00.000-07:00

Holy crap. Here I've been struggling to keep my measly four unique visitors a day, all the while teeming with jealousy over those so-called "A-Listers" who pump out great posts one after another.

Little did I know that they've been cheating by using AutoBlogger.

Damn them! Damn them all!

There's more to class than table manners and matching socks.

2005-05-16T16:45:00.000-07:00

I've noticed that when people talk about the "middle class" or "the upper class" here in the states, it's often in a rather vague way. I'm not sure why. Maybe a lack of energy for doing the research. Maybe a holdover from the idea that to talk about "class" refers to the system in Great Britain or India--and not the social strata in our so-called meritocracy.

Whatever the reason, it's an interesting if somewhat uncomfortable topic--one that's particularly relevant now that our wealth distribution has shifted even more in favor of the Haves. Our popular mythology rests on the idea of "movin' on up" a la George and Weezy, but "keepin' the status quo" is more like it.

And if you believe in Friedman's Flat World, the question of what's to happen to our lower and middle classes becomes all the more complicated.

The New York Times has done a nice group of articles on the subject. You can access the interactive features here, although you must sign up for a free membership. It's worth it.

Thanks to Snarkmarket for the link.

The start of Long-Tail advertising? Or just a way around Washington's current morality play?

2005-05-13T09:01:00.000-07:00

Amazing how fast stuff moves these days. Now a well-known podcast, The Dawn and Drew Show, has a sponsor/advertiser of sorts, Durex condoms.

Evidently, Durex chose the podcast medium to avoid FCC decency problems, which says just as much about the screwed up nature of that agency as it does about the viability and power of podcasting.

It's interesting b/c although the "reach" will be small the cost is no doubt low. And Durex is simply providing products to be reviewed instead of ads or scripts. Seems like a good way to find a small, relevant audience.

Personally, I haven't yet set aside the time to set up a podcatcher and listen to many casts. Between TiVo, all the damn blogs, the New Yorker, Harper's, various business rags/books and my pre-existing music collection, I already have too much crap to sift through.

Still, I'll be checking it out pretty soon. What we all need is the uberaggregator, one that learns our likes and interests over time. Hmm, maybe Tivo for RSS feeds?

Full story here, courtesy of AdAge.com.

Like the sands through an hourglass...

2005-05-10T13:37:00.000-07:00

My best friend posted today about how he came to live in France and run a B&B.

Like he said, it started 20 years ago, give or take a few weeks, at this institution of higher learning.

We were both writers for The Cowell Fish Wrap, a small paper I helped start, and we covered the antics of this young preacher named "Father Jim" who came and tried, unsuccessfully, to save our college from the perils of alcohol, drugs and pre-marital sex. (I have to give him props, though, for trying his best. Remember, this was 1985...in Santa Cruz of all places.)

Anyway, writing that story, and a shared opinion that The Selecter was the best ska band ever, cemented our friendship.

Fast forward 6 years to Lille, France in a crowded, smoky bar called Le Themis, which had the best collection of American soul, R&B and hiphop vinyl I've ever seen.

He's over visiting me and I introduce him to this really cool girl I know, who, aside from being beautiful, uniquely stylish and hilarious, knows how to speak English.

Wapow! My buddy never had a chance. One hair-raising car trip to a Belgian disco, another visit to Lille in May, and the rest, as they say, is history.

Ballmer changes stance on diversity issue.

2005-05-06T13:37:00.000-07:00

Wow. Steve Ballmer (MSoft's CEO if you're from another planet) sent out a memo this morning outlining the company's revised stance on getting involved in public policy issues.

You can read it here on Robert Scoble's blog.

Some key quotes:

"After looking at the question from all sides, I've concluded that diversity in the workplace is such an important issue for our business that it should be included in our legislative agenda."

"I'm proud of Microsoft's commitment to non-discrimination in our internal policies and benefits, but our policies can't cover the range of housing, education, financial and similar services that our people and their partners and families need. Therefore, it' appropriate for the company to support legislation that will promote and protect diversity in the workplace."

What can I say? I admire this move very, very much. It took guts to reverse their position, to honestly listen to their employees (both pro and con) and to face any criticism from conservative quarters.

Note to our current government: It shows strength and foresight to admit mistakes and correct them.

This link from those smart people over at Red Couch.

While you're there, read Chapter 4 of their communication opus on business blogging. Very, very good stuff.

PS: Sorry for the lack of posts. A surprisingly resilient stomach virus attacked me late last week.

"Live from England...it's PDG!"

2005-04-28T12:50:00.000-07:00

Fun podcast here from British agency PDG. David Coe and I have been emailing for awhile now. He's a riot. And a smart guy, too.

In this cast, he and ~~Alex (I believe)~~Dave Wilson discuss the wonders of RSS for internal comms, the important of user experiences, Tom Peters, MSoft/Scoble, 4G marketing strategies and the UK election. (Whew!) I also get a mention for coining the phrase "podcats," cool guys who podcast.

Actually, it's the 4G thing that got me into contact with David in the first place. And now as a double bonus, I get the cool accents and funky British swear words.

By the way, don't forget to vote for PDG in Podcast Alley.

UDDATE: Gates weighs in on the gay rights issue

2005-04-26T15:44:00.000-07:00

This is an interesting story. Corporations and politics. Religious morals and social rights. Threats, whining and emotion. And even though Yahoo! didn't cite it, the buzz was amplified, if wholly created, by a few bloggers. Crazy.

Microsoft May Rethink Gay Rights Stance

Thanks to Edward for the link.

Automotive physics for dummies

2005-04-26T10:00:00.000-07:00

My cousin Chris recently noticed those stange, vaguely informative billboards for SUV drivers and asks the appropriate question: What is ESUVEE.com? He discovers that it's a "helpful" site put up by the auto safety board. And he muses that maybe speeding tickets should be related to the size of your car, or better yet, your gas mileage.

I visited the site. It talks about driving speed, loading and tire pressure. Basic stuff. Nary a word about gas mileage. Or poor safety. Or the fact that Detroit auto makers actually have great disdain for SUV drivers. Or that psychological tests have shown said drivers on the whole to be more selfish and insecure than the norm.

(For back-up for those off-the-cuff assertsions, go here, here and here. Plus Malcom Gladwell's New Yorker article.)

Seems to me that if you need to explain to people how to use a specific piece of machinery, in this case the most popular vehicle in the land, it reveals two large problems: 1) roadway safety and 2) insufficient driver training.

The last two times I drove up to Tahoe in a snowstorm the only vehicles I saw stranded on the side of the highway were SUVs...a combination of false confidence and poor skills.

Microsoft gets screwed in the nasty world of sexual politics

2005-04-24T10:42:00.000-07:00

A small sh*tstorm is brewing up in Redmond. Apparently, Microsoft has decided to NOT support a bill in the Washington legislature that would protect homosexuals from employment, housing, banking and insurance discrimination. They did support such a thing last year. Now they're officially "neutral".

Robert Scoble, the uberblogger and MSoft employee want nuts over this one...publically...via this post on his blog.

The issue is whether MSoft is reacting to boycott threats from a Christian Pastor and what role a corporation should play in social politics. Read about it in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and The Stranger.

What I find most interesting in all this is the response from Scoble's boss, who states that "Social change should be initiated, and decided, outside the scope of corporations."

The train has left the station on that one, my friends, and to think otherwise is, well, an outstanding feat of self-delusion. Corporations dictate social change, or the lack thereof, all the time by influencing energy, environmental and financial policy to name just a few areas. Claiming otherwise is just a convenient screen to hide behind.

The question here isn't if MSoft supports social change--they already do, by providing domestic partner benefits since the early 1990s. The question is if they're willing to take the next step and risk alienating people who have a problem with homosexuality.

This is an issue only because "gay rights" (which I'll define here at a protection from discrimination) are still a bugaboo for many religious organizations, due to their selective desire to have government play a role in our private lives. And a pigheaded insistence that homosexuality is a "lifestyle choice".

Even more vexing about MSoft's stance is the both Gates and Balmer believe in equal rights for same-sex couples. That's their "personal" view, one which is instilled in MSoft HR policy. So, why doesn't this translate over to the public realm? Maybe it's because certain MSoft employees have complained. Maybe it's a matter of money. Maybe they just don't want to take this one on right now. Unfortunately, they don't have a choice, because it's been forced upon them by the BlogoLand.

Once you enter the policital realm, which they have with prior support of a non-discrimination bill, you're in the mix. To take leave of certain issues sends a specific message. MSoft should stick with their beliefs. If certain employees have problems with it, they should talk it out and do what they can.

But the die is cast here: You're the Big Boys, Steve and Bill. You've taken a stand. Now it's time to defend it.

[Here's my disclaimer for being totally ignorant of MSoft's inside workings, etc.]

Some other great links on this story, if you're interested. Thanks to Johnnie Moore for putting me on the trail.

Balmer's response memo.
Adam Barr, a fellow Softie adds his views.
Another interesting take on the story.
Johnnie Moore and others have put up a what they call a "snapcast" via Skype. (That's damn cool.)
Tony Goodson adds some additional post-cast thoughts.

Adobe hops on the corporate BS train

2005-04-22T10:02:00.000-07:00

Here's a funny, plain-spoken and probably quite accurate translation of the PR garbage that Adobe put out to announce the recent merger with Macromedia.

Once again, clear language trumps corporate BS. Only problem is, clear language requires that you tell the truth, and obviously, AdobeMacro didn't want to do that, probably because they don't want to admit they just purchased the market or that they intend to drive up the stock price by "streamlining".

As to what this means for the folk who use the software, all I can say is the real competition benefits the customer, real competition benefits the customer...

SIDE NOTE: Both my dad and uncle served in the Air Force during Vietnam. Upon receiving an email with the above press release, my uncle responded that it reminded him of the press conferences coming out of Saigon during the war...a whole lot of doubletalk that required real translation. Funny how things stay the same.

Hey, who farted?

2005-04-19T17:46:00.000-07:00

UPDATE: Where are my manners? This link from the smart folks over at Adrants.

I'm a loyal Mitchum deodorant user. Have been for years. But this new web site makes me think they're a bunch of wankers, like the married guys who troll online personals looking for "hot chicks".

Evidently, being a guy and using their product requires some specific requirements, and they've created the site to explain all the details.

In a really neato Flash intro, they also provide a pop quiz to see if you qualify:

If you didn't plan your own wedding.

If "ménage a trois" is the only French you know.

If your only real fear is commitment.

If "they" look real enough to you. (I leave you to figure out what "they" means...)

Oh, and I forgot, you have to bowl and golf.

You can just see some Marketing Meat Puppet presenting how they need to attract a younger demographic. Sure, it makes sense, but don't go about it in the most fake, cliché way possible. Especially when it has nothing to do with your product.

Want to go "20's and 30's" and sell deodorant? Show me fun ways I can get stinky. Take me to interesting countries. Show me something can I make. Better yet, show me why it's so important that I stay unstinky and how Mitchum can help. And if fake boobs fit in logically, okay, then go for it if you have to.

Larger question: Are today's younger men so confused about their identities that they'll fall for this sorry-ass sludge?

Brands continue to fall out of fashion.

2005-04-19T16:50:00.000-07:00

Like the prior post, more good stuff from PSFK on the value of brands.

Seems like the label matters less than it used to when it comes to clothes. I dont' think Donatella, Ralph and Giorgio are quaking in their boots, but they should pay attention--folks could easily tire of that particular status symbol.

Personalization and convenience will trump a big-ass marketing budget any time.

GM's Highway to Hell.

2005-04-19T16:45:00.000-07:00

This seems like really, really dumb idea.

GM's going to add their logo on cars from other divisions, like Chevy, Saab and Caddy.

Another case of head-in-the-sand thinking, misplaced faith in the power of brands and "umbrella-brand" theory.

Better to focus the GM line and differentiate it even more from the others. Hell, have them actively compete.

No response yet on GMs executive blog. I wonder if they'll pick up the thread.

Anyway, I can just hear the internal discussion that preceded this stellar move:

"We've spend $9 Gazillion on this brand. It must be worth something."

"Ok. Let's confuse people even more. And give our other divisions a marketing problem"

Sad. The U.S. auto industry really needs a turnaround about now.

Who's got a clue? Who's got next?

2005-04-17T22:13:00.000-07:00

A very involved conversation erupted at Hugh’s Place Friday. Ever hungry for the next big thing, folks were asking, “What comes after Cluetrain?

One of the manifesto's authors, Doc Searls, chimed in with this:

I've been asking "what's next" for the last six years. The next thing always comes up, along with the last thing. Like some of you say, it's an evolutionary thing. Circular, sort of. The Invisible Hand writes in cursive. Also in cartoons. You can't see it if your life is the nib.

By the way, the next step after Cluetrain, IMHO, is Markets are Relationships. Of course, Hugh/Thomas/TheRestofUs are already there, no?

I responded—without irony or flippancy—that this reminded me of the mid to late 90’s, when “relationship marketing” was all the rage, and 121 meant “one to one” instead of “one hundred twenty one”.

Like Doc says, the next thing comes along with the last. And the old last thing sometime comes back as the new thing, when the timing, technology and market are right. (The Newton, anyone?)

In his typical style, Hugh responded Sunday with a drawing of a genital hygene aid and the bald statement that what comes after Cluetrain is making money with Cluetrain.

I’m not big into proclamations or line-in-the-sand thinking. Many people think more often and more intelligently about this stuff than me, but with a strong apology for stating the obvious, I will say this about what’s happening now:

}} Markets have always been relationships, often bad ones. But in today’s connected, pancake-flat world, the conditions exist to have real “two-way” connections.

}} People/companies/governments/universities/societies/communities that understand this will prosper in the right way. Those who don’t will resort to increasingly repressive measures to keep the status quo, with all of the usual consequences.

}} As our material choices reach the unlimited, we will reduce them through aggregators, trusted opinions and iron will. These sources of information will become more powerful than the sellers themselves.

}} With so many alternatives meeting so many subjective wants, “the best of all” will lose importance. “Best for me” and “good enough for me” will take its place.

}} Convenience and personalization will overtake choice as the most important aspect of buying something. Quality will matter, too, but not as much as the first two. The importance of price will depend on all of these factors.

}} Advertising as we know it will cease to really sell anything. It won’t disappear completely because it’s become too large a part of our society but will continue as branded entertainment, still trying to make us feel like we don’t measure up to an artificially created status quo. It will no longer be worth what people are paying today.

}} We’ve reached a saturation point with marketing messages. We are unable to absorb anymore. We don’t have the time or the brain cells. So the marketing will have to become un-marketing. It will have to mean something to me and me only. That’s the genius of the Cluetrain/Hughtrain et al.

}} To take Alan Gutierrez’s idea that “software will be like jazz” one step further, intellectual capital will be like jazz. That’s what blogs and Wiki really are: the jam session on a global scale.

}} This new jazz will still follow a basic set of rules (notes, time signatures, etc), but what happens in between will no longer follow established Western conventions. Get ready to see the world from someone else’s perspective.

}} Corporations will start to blog en masse. They will change what “blogging” means to meet their needs. Purists will scream, whine and despair, until they find the next big thing, and then the whole process will start again.

}} As business and commerce become global on an individual scale, the real meaning of “American” will blur. Our government will attempt to fill this void with nationalist slogans and fear. Can’t say I blame them, but the wise will keep their eyes open.

}} The Boston Red Sox will not win another World Series.

Watch out! The lab mice now hold the remote.

2005-04-15T08:54:00.000-07:00

Traditional advertisers take it in the shorts again as data shows that people really don't want to watch commercials.

Lost ad revenues are estimated to reach $27 billion over five years. Not a huge percentage of total, I think, but a sizeable warning shot.

Yet another sign of what should have been painfully obvious at least two years ago: Old School Big Media is done.

Many smart bloggers have been talking about this for quite some time. And The Cluetrain laid it all down six years ago. If you're still working for a living, no matter what you do, take the time to read this book...twice.

Advertising and marketing people spend so much time blowing their own horns, it's easy to dismiss the noise as just that. Don't let yourself fall into that trap. The way we go about selling has profoundly changed. And the people in my generation are much less interested in being sold.

Stay tuned. This should get really interesting in the next year or so.

Seriously distorted priorities

2005-04-12T13:11:00.000-07:00

If we're interrupting our sex lives to answer the cell phone, we obviously need to turn the damn things off.

Who knew the CrackBerry could threaten the modern marriage?

Another crack in the walls of Chateau Advertising?

2005-04-06T08:24:00.000-07:00

SEARS CUTS Y&R, OGILVY & MATHER AGENCY FEES

Holy crap. Don't even know where to get started here.

1. Does this mean that the dog has finally started to wag the tail? How cool would that be if Sears just said, "Look, you're not doing squat for us. We're paying you less. Stop whining. We hate when you whine Here's a tissue."

2. "Last year Sears spend about $640 million on advertising split between Y&R and Ogilvy." If you spend $640MM wouldn't you expect some real results? Like sales increases? Or something?

3. Combined, the newly formed Sears/Kmart spent $815MM on advertising last year. I guess you really gotta spend money to lose money in this world.

4. Viewed that Walmart and Target are kicking their ass, wouldn't it maybe make sense to take some of that billion dollars and invest it in their stores, their products and their people? Maybe that's what Eddie Lampert is doing. I hope sure hope so.

UPDATE: Another thought. Sears has fantastic appliances and tools. Consumer Reports rates Kenmore as the best in many categories. Perhaps they should focus on those businesses instead of "the softer side," expanding the product mix to include more environmentally efficient models, colors, etc. I'm not a businessman, nor do I have an MBA, but it seems to make sense to me.

There's a wonderful world outside of Paris.

2005-04-05T22:11:00.000-07:00

Looking to go to France and experience the "real thing"?

Don't want to be put off by grizzled, jaded tourism vets who look at you like a walking wallet?

Still a little foggy on the whole subjunctive thing?

Want to enjoy fresh baked bread as the sweetest yellow lab in the world rests her head on your lap and looks lovingly into your eyes?

Then, do yourself a huge favor, and go here.

Micky Dee's goes granola

2005-03-22T16:30:00.000-08:00

MCDONALD'S UNVEILS GLOBAL AD CAMPAIGN AIMED AT CHILDREN

Wow. So I guess the child obesity problem must have "tipped," if you'll pardon the pun.

As much as I want to type a bunch of cynical, smart-ass comments about this effort--which I think it ultimately deserves--another angle is far more important:

If a corporation can see profit in "the right thing," it will do it. That's the trick, though, to show them the money. I've given up wanting multi-nationals to have a conscience. It would be nice--and I'll pay more to buy from a company that has one--but I'll settle for them responding to public pressure and earnings concerns.

Maybe kids won't eat the healthy food. Maybe they will. But at least now it's available. And all the other corporate fast food sheep will have to follow McD's lead. Soon, they'll be battling for "health-conscious mind share" and "low calorie relevance scores".

Now, for smart-ass comments, check out the McD's Top Global Brand Weenie Dean Barrett taking the tough stand:

"We have a job to do in communicating this message. We are not going to back away; we are not going to stop talking to kids in ways that are relevant."

You'd think he was talking about teen pregnancy or HIV infection. Good on ya, Dean! Power to the SVPs!

Mommy, can I have a branded experience, please?

2005-03-21T08:24:00.000-08:00

This today from AdAge:

MSN EXPANDS ONLINE BRANDED-ENTERTAINMENT CAPABILITIES

New Strategy Directly Challenges Yahoo's Lead Position

NEW YORK (Adage.com) -- In a move that expands its potential for online branded entertainment deals, Microsoft Corp.'s MSN has renamed its custom-publishing division to the MSN branded entertainment experiences team, doubled its staff and increased its budget, according to the company.

"The Branded Experiences Team"? What the hell is that? The article goes on:

On the Madison & Vine front, Chief Media Officer Joanne Bradford said that while the group already handles a number of branded entertainment clients, it will now focus more on entertainment-type Web sites, instead of merely creating interactively rich online experiences for marketers.
"Advertisers are really trying to find another way to break through," Ms. Bradford said, and the division "will build experiences that integrate advertising and content."

This sounds depressingly familiar. We're the mice, the "branded entertainment" is the cheese, and the advertisers are the bastards in the white lab coats.

As my friend Doug L says: "Hey man, someone always ends up paying for the content."

Unless you're reading a blog, of course.

Full article here.

Bland, er, I mean brand essence

2005-03-20T15:09:00.000-08:00

Brand Guy: “What we need to is increase traction by focusing on the authentic core brand equities and brand essence.
Me (to myself): “In other words, we need to clear and honest about what we can do for people.”

I work as a copywriter in the in-house communications department for a Fortune 500 company. The quote above comes from a large group meeting I attended last week. (It’s an amalgamation of many terms thrown about.) I’ve heard that type of brand jibber jabber above for years. I know what it means, but man, am I tired of hearing it.

What struck me, as I sat in my comfortable chair trading notes with my account partner, is how as we babble on about brands, we become more and more distanced from what a “brand” is supposed to be and do. (And these days, that’s totally up for grabs.)

We call research firms, futz with colors, change messages, hire new agencies--and still remain separated from the very people we’re hoping to reach. Basically, we lose sight of ourselves and our customers.

By treating the brand as a construct we become dishonest, and worse, we treat the people we hope will buy our stuff as constructs, too. (Hamish at Cardboard Spaceship has a great post that talks about this subject.)

It’s like when you meet a person for the first time, and taking in their initial rap and exterior appearance, you form an initial opinion, one that you feel is honest. A few weeks or months later, you understand it was a sham, and that they were basically lying to you the whole time. And them you cut them off.

Realizing this, companies are desperately trying to find “authentic voice of their brand”. That’s funny and sad to me. Like trying to find out who you really are—just take an honest look at your actions and beliefs, it’s right in front of your face, you know?

(Evelyn Rodriquez has very interesting views about this, as does the ever-humorous Hugh MacLeod.)

So instead of worrying so much about their brands, I think companies can help themselves by thinking deeply about themselves instead. They can cut through the layer of expensive, dubiously effect crap that represents their logo, tagline and colors. Get to the heart of the matter, the real, simple and clear “great thing” they bring to their customers.

Maybe it’s time to just dump the damn brand altogether for a while, and treat our companies like the very thing they’re composed of--human beings--and talk about them as such.

The life that ate my blog

2005-03-14T20:53:00.000-08:00

"Focus, Daniel-san."
"Wax on. Wax off."
--The Karate Kid

Poor me, right? I've this well-paid day job that's kicking my ass, taking time from doing the all-important work of jotting down thoughts here. My extended family keeps asking to see me. And I've got a wonderful wife who for some strange reason wants to spend time with me, away from the computer, away from writing. Wow, I've got it rough.

I'm sure all the other smart and talented folks who blog out there have similar problems. Or worse. And yet, they keep at it, day after day. Jotting down a quick post or a long missive of interesting thoughts, observations, jokes and cartoons. The trick, I'm learning, is that you have to do it regularly, like exercise or personal hygiene.

So instead of writing about a topic that came to mind on the bus home involving a Roots lyric, Alain de Botton, Malcom Gladwell and Rakim, I'm going to exhort you to visit some or all of the links on my page. Really. Just click and read. You may not understand the context of what's going on there. I didn't at first and sometimes still don't. But it's worth it to visit every few days. I've learned so much in the past two months my head hurts.

One more thing: add your comments to posts you find interesting. Obviously, this hasn't caught on here at NonstopExpress. But I'm hopeful you'll take the plunge. Just add your opinion. If you're feeling crazy, add your real name. It can often take you to interesting places. This whole web thing is the mother of all conversations, and if you've got a box that's connected you're invited. (Yes, I admit it, I've been reading The Cluetrain, okay?)

Here are a few blogs I haven't added that I think are really good to frickin' fantastic:

Doc Searls
Evelyn Rodriquez
Cardboard Spaceship
English Cut

The wisdom of las ondas

2005-02-23T19:55:00.000-08:00

Beach
Originally uploaded by Timbo_.

Me: "I see surfers stand and watch waves for a long time before getting in the water. Do you count the sets and the individual waves in each set? Do you count which number in each set is the best?"
Pause.
Surfer Guy: "No. It's more of a feeling."

While in Sayulita I tried to surf and learned that the ocean is much bigger than I am. Much, much bigger.

In typical fashion, I tried to analyze it in a whole Henry Ford, assembly line kind of way. Just doesn't work like that.

Now, the best surfers no doubt completely scope out the sets and all that stuff. But what my French expatriate surfing guru was trying to tell me, I think, was that the best way to get good waves is to get a feel for what's happening, then drop in at just the right moment.

I could spin this into a Zen-like parable about life, the whole "go with the flow" thing, but I think that's pretty self-evident.

The lesson for me is this: Better to make the most of what particular wave you're riding than to search endlessly for the best wave of all. Choose wisely, but when you're in, there's nothing to do except keep your eyes open and go like hell.

Hunter S. est mort

2005-02-23T18:58:00.000-08:00

I first read "Fear and Loathing" age the age of 10. Then again in junior high school, high school and college. The drugs and alcohol were exotic, to be sure, but it was the utter mayhem and humor that hooked me. Although he became somewhat of a caricature in his later years, I think we'll miss such an explosive, deadly accurate social critic.

Here's what a close friend of mine had to say via email:

I was fortunate enough to hear Hunter S. Thompson speak in December 1984 at San Diego State. On his college tour, he would have a "host" from the school paper or journalism society meet him at the airport, escort him during the day, and then get him to the podium on time.

Our host approached the podium at about 8:15, and surveyed the crowd of 300. I remember that his hair was very tousled, that his tie was slightly undone. But what I remember most clearly that he was positively confused, as if he were watching himself from five miles away, finding it somewhat confusing but still fascinating. He looked at us, looked at the microphone, and just...stood there. For 60, 90 seconds. And then, "I'm just..." Another 90 second pause. You could have heard a pin drop. "...so" 10 seconds searching for the words "...fucked up right now". We all cheered him, and someone led him offstage. (To a cot? Tijuana? White Slavery?) I often wonder what happened between the 10:00 AM arrival of the plane and the 8:00 PM lecture.

Thompson surveyed all of this from behind a table. He had a microphone, many cigarettes and a bottle of Wild Turkey on ice. The day that had nearly killed our host had done nothing to him. He spoke for the next hour of his adventures, read from his work in progress and took questions from the crowd. He drank copiously. A friend from my dorm floor was so overwhelmed he just thanked Thompson three times instead of asking a question when it was his turn at the mike.

I remember feeling like that host at San Diego State when I got a hold of my uncle's copies of Fear and Loathing and Hell's Angels when I was thirteen. The right books at the right time-a mind bending experience.

I'd like to think that if it was 1972 and I was upstairs from Raoul Duke's party, I would have wandered down and joined the party instead of calling the front desk to complain. Probably wouldn't have, but I'd like to think so. What would you have done?

Inside the Deathstar

2005-02-17T21:51:00.000-08:00

Earlier today I commented on post about Microsoft by a whipsmart, somewhat irascible guy named Hugh McLeod on his site gaping void. Hugh proposes, among other things, that Microsoft's real competition in the world isn't Apple or Linux, but rather M.I.T.

This idea may seem weird without the marketing theory back story, so to be brief, there is considerable velocity behind the idea that brands are places instead of things. (That's how MacLeod describes it here.) So, Microsoft is a place where you "go" to experience, to improve, to learn. Furthermore, Microsoft is in fact a "campus," a physical and intellectual locale, a fact aptly illustrated in the blog of Robert Scoble, who works there.

I posted this comment:
So why is it that Microsoft products are often buggy, bloated and difficult to manage? How can they put more "campus" in their software?

And Scoble replied:
Our real competition? Windows 2000.
Tim: we're working on it. If we don't make better products no one will upgrade. Windows 2000 will have won.

All the preamble leads to this: Why is it that all of the smarts and innovation MSoft engenders inside its walls doesn't seem to make it to the screen? A huge question. A loaded question--the pro and con MSoft camps are more vehemently opposed than the Blues and Reds these days. But to me it loops back to this idea that companies need to have their true passion and intent fully represented in their products. And somehow, through buggy/bloated code (so I've read--I'm not a geek), bad PR, confusing product naming/introductions, a well-deserved image as the Software Bully, etc., MSoft isn't making the grade here. And I think they can.

Maybe it's partly a matter of them concentrating on the user experience more, of simplifying the visible nuts and bolts. (I think that software should be like a swan swimming on a lake; serene and calm on the surface and paddling like mad underneath.) Maybe since their software isn't tied to elegant pieces of software like Apple they're losing out on a closer physical connection with their customers. Maybe they're just like the Dallas Cowboys of the 90's--"America's Team," who you love to hate just becaue they're Numero Uno.

Now as a long-time Mac user, I have no love for Microsoft, even though I've used Word every day of my working life, and to be honest, the program does exactly what I need it to. And I have my conspiracy theories that they purposefully make the Mac versions of their products inferior and more difficult to use. (But I'm over putting too much emotion into that silly Mac vs. PC argument. Most of the time it's a stupid pissing contest, and those went out in grade school.)

Still, it's unfortunate the company hasn't been able to communicate more of what they're really about. Some may say that their true aim is total domination, etc., but I think the people who create software do so in large part to fix a problem, to make the impossible possible; in short, to make our lives somehow easier, more vivid and more interesting.

Not a bad story, really. And if it's true, how does Microsoft go about getting the word out?

The boomerang effect

2005-02-15T20:45:00.000-08:00

Jody O: "Guess what? Wizner wrote a book!"
Me: "Huh? Dang. I'm the guy who wrote the Homecoming Talent Show!"

Franz Wisner, a guy I knew fairly well in high school (we were in between classmates and true friends) has written a book about traveling. Well, to be more precise, he's written a book about what happened when he was left at the alter and took his honeymoon with his somewhat estranged brother. The two-week trip to Costa Rica turned into something like two years of around-the-world adventures.

He popped up today on the Today Show, looking a bit shell-shocked in front of Matt Lauer but nevertheless exhibiting the glib positiveness and Cheshire smile I remember so well from Davis Senior High School. (You can see video here if you scroll down to "More Today Show Video" and click 7 of 11.) And while I'm sure the book is a good one--it's generated considerable press and been optioned as a movie--what struck me is how a person from the past can enter your life in a context completely relevant and even prescient.

Not that I would ever have wished to have my engagement broken off five days before the big event; I am blissfully happy and ridiculously fortunate to married. What's interesting to me is how a guy seemingly born to be slick and successful in business and politics (remember the Popular Table) decided to chuck the rat race and head out with little more than a backpack and vague discontent. Even better, by following his instincts, applying some elbow grease and working his contacts, he's managed to find his bliss, so to speak. Pretty wonderful stuff. I wish it for all of us.

Check out "Honeymoon With My Brother." There are good things to be pulled from the whole deal.

Reentry

2005-01-29T14:18:00.000-08:00

Sunset
Originally uploaded by Timbo_.

As we passed through Customs in Phoenix, the agent said, "Welcome back to the land where minutes matter." How true. And how sad.

Coming back from a trip elsewhere is never easy, especially if you've had the chance to let your active, worrying mind take a rest, put itself on cruise control while your body and your soul soak up some sun and saltwater.

So it was with great regret that I put shoes on my feet for the first time in five days Wednesday morning and headed to work. And did that daily comedy ever seem silly.

"Damn, I missed the light! That's 45 seconds of my earth shatteringly important time wasted!"

How, I asked myself, can we do this five days out of seven? And then spend our weekends as a consumer/errand pit stop, fueling up for the next few laps? Why are we in such a hurry? What are we running toward or from with such alacrity?

These are banal questions working stiffs ask themselves after vacation, but I suspect that if we don't allow them to dissipate into the ether of our daily routine and concerns, they may yield some revealing answers, or perhaps even more profound questions.

For my part, I hope that whatever conclusions I reach help me to rush around far less and to spend more time shoeless in warmer climes.

The value of travel

2005-01-19T07:51:00.000-08:00

Natalie and I are headed to Mexico for six days starting Thursday. We’re going to stay in the little town of Sayulita, located about 30 miles north of Puerto Vallarta. Some of you may remember that we took a trip there 2 years ago.

As luck would have it, recently I’ve been reading “The Art of Travel” by Alain de Botton. If you’re not familiar with him (I think it’s pronounced “duh botton” like “cotton”), check him out. I’m not sure how to classify him—intellectual, philosopher, social critic—but he applies his vast knowledge of classical philosophy, art and literature to modern life in the most unusual, amusing ways. In this particular volume he turns his attention to many aspects of travel, including its benefits, its role in helping us to discover new environs and how it can mirror important aspects of our own characters.

Anyway, as anyone acquainted with my better half knows, she loves to travel, and I’m a most willing disciple. From my two years in France, I’ve learned the value of being somewhere else, how the physical and psychological distance from home can allow us to penetrate ever deeper into our most familiar surroundings, our minds, and come to important and unimportant conclusions at our leisure.

That’s one of the reasons why I love travel so much. It allows me to get out of my own way and to shed the constrictions of the clock, my in box and the gym. It’s more than just forced idleness. Having to subtly adjust to language, customs and architecture acts as a positive distraction, putting your upfront consciousness to work so the background can ponder other, weightier matters.

Or as De Botton puts it, travel provides “an alternative to the selfish ease, the habits and confinement of the ordinary, rooted world.”

Really, you gotta check this guy out. And with that, I’m off to sit in the sun.

P.S. Sorry for the lack of links. I haven't yet figured out how to do that.

A seat at the Popular Table.

2005-01-15T18:11:00.000-08:00

Walking down Market Street last week, I noticed a billboard on the side of a Muni bus that advertised the season premier of "Alias". As Jennifer Garner's slightly flushed face passed by, I started thinking about Ben Affleck. (Horrors of horrors, I know.) Somewhere I had heard that the two of them had started dating. Then I pondered his relationship with the other Jennifer and how that whole situation imploded (like we didn’t see that coming), which led illogically to Brad and yet another Jen, and another failed relationship.

Jennifer and Ben I. Jennifer and Ben II. Brad and Jennifer. (What is it with that name?) Ashton and Demi. Bruce and Demi. A bevy of beautiful women sucked dry of their life force by that vampire Lenny Kravitz. Why do I know about these couples? And why, on some internal level, do I even care?

Our fascination with celebrities has been on the journalistic hot list for quite some time now, and I’m sure that more than a few exceedingly well read and perhaps well paid members of the Academy have produced intellectually scintillating tomes on the subject, managing just barely hide their contempt for the Masses and their own love of popular culture and fame.

For my part, I have a simple explanation, one that takes into account three basic facts about the affliction:

1) That we're apt to project our own dissatisfaction onto the lives of others
2) That the 8 pm broadcast of “Yet Another Boozy, Slutty Heiress” helps further anesthetize us from the snake pit of social anxiety that is our day-to-day life
3) That we bought into this kind behavior long before we were able to buy cable, flat screen TVs or subscribe to Cosmo, People or Sports Illustrated.

My theory? WE NEVER REALLY LEAVE HIGH SCHOOL.

Think about it for a second. Travel back in time to those days of misplaced hormonal energy, naïve searches for self-expression and the facial blemish. Haven’t we just traded one set of social groups for another? Haven’t the Burnouts, the Jocks, the 4-H'ers, the Band People, the Nerds, the Yearbook Staff, the Student Government and the Drama Crowd (the one group I really wish I’d hung with) simply been replaced by the Yuppies, the Dinks, the Believers, the NeoCons, the Weekend Warriors, the Ethnics, the Convicts, the Lawyers, the Tradesmen, the Liberals, etc.? Aren’t we all still simply fighting for that prime piece of real estate on the Quad of Life?

Back in my high school we had Franz and Kitty, Franz and Randy, Mark and Michelle, Dave and Shannon. They copped the gossip, they hit the headlines, they had the big break-ups in between becoming Homecoming Royalty, making big plays or starting new fashion trends. The rest of us simply trudged along in our run-of-the-mill heartbreaks, our second-tier group parties, our normal-size pressures and dreams. Or so we thought.

The truth of the matter is that all of us shared a life of great intensity—and we still do. The fascination with stars can act as a harmless diversion, but it can also reinforce the idea that we’re less than. And that’s only true if we accept rules and value systems designed to keep us forever reaching for the unreachable. So, screw the Popular Table. Being human is credential enough to occupy space in this universe. Based on the evident hassles of being famous, I have no doubt that all three Jennifers, Ben, Brad and even Bruce often long for our relatively peaceful anonymity.