Posts tagged Business Thoughts
spinal tap marketing
Apr 23rd
Ok.
This is about the senseless marketing inflation that is becoming prevalent in the marketing world and I am going to use the movie Spinal Tap to show how bad it is.
Just in case you don’t remember the movie Spinal Tap, or the moment I am going to reference, here it is:
“Our speakers no longer just go to ten … they go to 11! Well, it’s one louder, isn’t it? It’s not 10. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at 10. You’re on 10 here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you’re on 10 on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?”
<Nigel Tufnel, explaining why his amp goes up to 11>
Here’s the deal. Look around at some marketing these days. If you are kind you will call it ‘value inflation’ … if you aren’t kind it is puffery.
And good ole The Economist actually gave me some great fodder in a recent edition (so I am going to steal some of their words shamelessly).
Their article showcased an aspect of how marketing is inflating everything.
Marketing inflation?
- Take the grossly underreported problem of “size inflation”, where clothes of any particular labelled size have steadily expanded over time. Estimates by The Economist suggest that the average British size 14 pair of women’s trousers is now more than four inches wider at the waist than it was in the 1970s. In other words, today’s size 14 is really what used to be labelled a size 18; a size 10 is really a size 14. (American sizing is different, but the trend is largely the same.) Fashion firms seem to think that women are more likely to spend if they can happily squeeze into a smaller label size.
- Inflation is also distorting the travel business. A five-star hotel used to mean the ultimate in luxury, but now six- and seven-star resorts are popping up as new hotels award themselves inflated ratings as a marketing tool. “Deluxe” rooms have been devalued, too: many hotels no longer have “standard” rooms, but instead offer a choice of “deluxe” (the new standard), “luxury”, “superior luxury” or “grand superior luxury”. Likewise, most airlines no longer talk about “economy” class. British Airways instead offers World Traveller; Air France has Voyageur. Sardine class would be more honest. The value of frequent-flyer miles is also being eroded by inflation: it is increasingly hard to book “free” flights; they cost more miles, and redemption fees have increased. This was inevitable: airlines have been issuing so many miles (for spending on the ground as well as in the air) that the total stock is worth more than all the dollar notes and coins in circulation.
- Food-portion inflation has also made it harder to fight the flab. Pizzas now come in regular, large and very large. Starbucks coffees are Tall, Grande, Venti or (soon) Trenta. “Small” seems to be a forbidden word.
I believe this shameless hyperbole has become a plague in marketing. It is puffery at its worst.
And it is shameful for 2, among many, reasons:
- It inspires confusion.
Confusion in that the value equation has been disrupted. Marketers have assumed we will value a ‘7 star’ over a ‘5 star’ because … well … it has more stars. Instead marketers have simply devalued an individual star to a point people are so confused they simply assess value on their own. Oh. And by doing THAT people will inevitably focus on the wrong things (commodity attributes & price). Confusion is bad in marketing.
- In inspires distrust.
Because in the act of building false value <under the guise of differentiation> we are discrediting what we actually do. Inevitably this makes people basically lose trust in what we say. With the lack of trust marketers have no value to people … leading to simply ignoring or tuning out any messaging. Oh. And if marketers have no value then why have them? Regardless. No one is clear what is the ‘truth.’ And when that happens they disregard what is being said and simply ignore it. And ignore it for what it really is <as a truth> hyperbole.
Oh.
And it is shameful because it is lazy. Yes. Lazy. I fully admit that it is significantly harder to discern what is really true in today’s world. But that is no excuse for marketers. In fact rather than try to take the ‘easy road’ <albeit the road with some horrible long term repercussions> marketers should be focusing on the more difficult road – truth.
Anyway. Back to the spinal tap marketing issue. The Economist suggests it is a form of inflation.
I am less kind.
It is hyperbole. And the worst kind. Because we are trying to skew what people think by stretching the truth <is that lying?>.
Lying sounds harsh but what else do we call it when we ‘create’ differentiation.
I fully understand that marketers need to respond to the market in order to help ‘sell their stuff.’ In this case this bad marketing behavior was exhibited in response to a couple of trends as identified by trendwatching – Mass Class and its opposite trend Massclusivity.
Increasing general prosperity spawned millions of new consumers interested in copying the tastes and preferences of the ‘rich & famous.’ This meant that manufacturers jumped on the enormous economies of scale as represented by this new mass of consumers by imitating the best of the best with lower cost alternatives. In some cases they imitated well. in other cases they simply imitated … with a lesser product. Regardless of their true quality, or non-quality, they imitated. And in doing so ultimately lowered the value of that which actually deserved the value.
This trend also spawned the next level called Massclusivity. Offering a level of privilege or status to the masses. Unfortunately it most likely offered neither privilege nor status to the traditional old style upper middle class.
So. In order to try and solve the problem marketers started ‘creating value’ in these absurd ways. The real problem? The imitators did it as well as the ‘real quality value’ providers. The imitators, in their falseness, blurred value.
It is too late but one would have wished that marketers would have been strong enough to stand up to the false imitators and stopped the problem before it began. But I imagine that means the marketing ‘hacks’ would have left money on the table and missed out on their opportunity for personal prosperity.
Oh well.
Marty DiBergi: David St. Hubbins… I must admit I’ve never heard anybody with that name.
David St. Hubbins: It’s an unusual name, well, he was an unusual saint, he’s not a very well known saint.
Marty DiBergi: Oh, there actually is, uh… there was a Saint Hubbins?
David St. Hubbins: That’s right, yes.
Marty DiBergi: What was he the saint of?
David St. Hubbins: He was the patron saint of quality footwear.
An entirely different level is of absurdity is that marketers also create spokespeople for random products & services hoping that they embody some type of credibility. In the attempt at borrowed interest the marketer simply gains a lack of believability. Ok. Good intentions … bad result.
Hopefully it never becomes as absurd as a ‘patron saint of quality footwear.’
And, yes, even beyond the spokespeople endorsers … it all becomes absurd at some point.
And in its absurdity it actually devalues everything it come in contact with <the second most disturbing would be the devaluing of trust>. The foremost disturbing is that it distorts behavior because so many people are confused they aren’t sure what is actually the best thing to do <because inflating thru marketing suggest there is no real ‘best’ alternative>.
I imagine to be fair to those in marketing it appears this senseless inflation is prevalent throughout society.
There is grade inflation, the tendency for comparable academic performance to be awarded higher grades over time. In Britain the proportion of A-level students given “A” grades has risen from 9% to 27% over the past 25 years. Yet other tests find that children are no cleverer than they were. A study by Durham University concluded that an A grade today is the equivalent of a C in the 1980s. In American universities almost 45% of graduates now get the top grade, compared with 15% in 1960. Grade inflation makes students feel better about themselves, but because the highest grade is fixed, it also causes grade compression, which distorts relative prices. This is unfair to the brightest, whose grades are devalued against those of average students. It also makes it harder for employers to identify the best applicants.
There is job title inflation, where a fancier-sounding title is cheaper than a pay raise. Companies now have an excess of chiefs and directors. Job title inflation has economic costs if it makes it more difficult to assess proper compensation for skills.
Anyway.
Now that I have been fair to marketing people I will suggest it is no excuse.
I have already mentioned the professional laziness.
But, the bigger issue is that marketing, in many ways, can influence society and attitudes and ultimately behavior.
Marketing can lead.
Marketing has in fact a responsibility to lead society. Inflation is ultimately a value equation. If marketing establishes non-absurd value equations attitudes are established.
I know it seems absurd that I wrote a serious piece about marketing using Spinal Tap.
But it moves beyond absurdity with me when I realize I can write a serious piece on marketing using Spinal Tap as an example.
It disturbs me.
Which leads me to the close:
“It does disturb me, but I rise above it. I’m a professional” – Nigel
Trying to inflate value simply means we devalue what really is.
And if marketing does it ultimately it establishes a devalued benchmark. Yeah … yeah … yeah … some smartass is going to suggest that marketing is establishing a ‘new value economy.’
Baloney.
It is simply devaluing the existing one.
turn your back on what you know
Apr 20th
“To truly learn turn your back on what you know … leave it all behind. 
To truly know the world you must immerse yourself in what is not your knowledge.” – Tibetan thought
Oh my.
Immerse yourself in what is not your knowledge.
That may be one of the most difficult things in the world to do.
It is natural to gravitate to what is most comfortable … that which you know and that which is the easiest for you to do.
I imagine many of us do this just as part of every day life and tell ourselves we are still learning as we bump into others who do something different and watch from afar.
But that is having one foot in what you know and maybe dipping a toe into what you don’t.
That isn’t truly ‘learning.’
At some point in order to truly learn you must … well … leave it all behind.
And that is difficult. Really difficult.
I know I cheat. How? I use young people. I try and place the situation in their hands, step back and listen. And I don’t judge <or eliminate possibilities>. It is my way of ‘immersing in what is not your knowledge.’ In their inexperience <within my own experience> they share a world of experiences in which I have no knowledge.
Oh.
I may think I do. But I don’t. It is a difficult thing for most of us to do … turn your back on what you know.
But I find it easier as long as I keep this other Tibetan thought in mind:
“Is being an investigator the opposite of being an artist? Maybe it is just that some mysteries require an artist not an investigator. That an artist has different ways to get to the truth.” – Tibetan thought
The path to truth is not just one path. Sure. I may know one ‘truth.’ But in knowing that I know … well … one thing. And I am sure many people are fine with the knowledge of one truth. And I do not begrudge them of that. For one truth is, at its core, a truth. And I believe everyone needs some truth in their life.
Does knowing more than one truth make someone better? Yikes. I don’t believe I could be a good judge of that. Because knowing multiple truths can be confusing … and in confusion someone just may not end up in a better place. I guess I would suggest that if multiple truths put you on more solid ground than go for it.
But the real point to this is that someone without YOUR knowledge is more likely to teach you something completely new than someone who shares your knowledge.
And, ultimately, if you are trying to understand the world, or simply solve a problem, to truly learn the answer … you may have to turn your back on everything you know.
judgment
Mar 28th
“Statistics are no substitute for judgment.” - Henry Clay
I was tempted to call this “when statistics get in the way of a good decision.”
Let me get this out of the way upfront. I like numbers. I have an Economics undergraduate and accounting accounted for several of my good grades in college. And I like that if you weave your way through numbers they can tell you things that can inspire the ‘real’ thought. And I like the fact that numbers can sway an “I think” based opinion to a “here is what I know” based opinion.
Anyway. I purposefully used Henry Clay (so think maybe 1800 as to date of the quote) so that some contemporary statistical gwonk doesn’t come out of the woodwork saying something along the lines of “statistics have only evolved in the last 20 years” or something crazy like that. “We have never had better data to make decisions from than today!” is a statement that was as true in 1800 as it is in 2012 and as it was in 100 BC.
This is an eternal issue.
People have looked at statistics since the time good ole Adam started calculating how many apples fell out of the tree to figure out how often he was gonna get laid.
Henry Clay just had the luck to be quoted on it.
So before I begin my rant let me say, yes, I get decision-making is a cognitive process … where the outcome is a choice between alternatives. And that numbers can play a role.
I also get that people have different preferences as to how to approach decision making and that there will always be a varying degree between thinking and feeling and numbers and experiential.
And I do believe all decisions, at least the worthwhile ones, have to incorporate some sense of logical decision-making. Logic in that we seek to exclude <or marginalize> emotions <as well as personal biases> and try to use only rational methods <perhaps even mathematical/statistical tools> with the intent to isolate what is typically called the decision utility.
I get all that.
Oh.
And by the way … I hope no one tries to dump the whole “left brain/right brain” mumbo jumbo on me because science has already proven that is an urban myth (yeah … I will write something on that). There is no right brain left brain.
There is no “numbers are facts” crap.
Yeah. On that last one ….
“Torture numbers, and they’ll confess to anything.” – Gregg Easterbrook
Numbers don’t lie.
But they also don’t tell you what to do. In saying that let me suggest why I believe this statistical ‘torturing numbers’ issue has been an issue for eternity.
The thought.
Many people who don’t want to make decision … okay … maybe they just get nervous with accountability … use statistics to make the decision … not inform a decision.
Why?
Well. There are boatloads of reasons but suffice it to say that without using numbers … you are getting paid (or at least judged) not just on decision-making skills but on your judgment skills. That means accountability is solely on you (the person).
Think about that. But also think about this (as you get judged). The following is an explanation on decision making using statistics:
Decision Making Under Uncertainty: Statistical Decision Theory
I’d like to start today’s lecture with a reminder about something I said a long time ago when we finished our survey of population viability analysis. Population viability analysis is best seen not as a way of garnering precise predictions about the fate of a population but as a way of ensuring that all relevant life-history variables have been considered, that they have been considered efficiently, and that we have a reasonable sense of the trajectory that the population is likely to follow if current trends continue. It provides a way of structuring our thinking about the problem. That’s precisely the way I think we should regard the approach to decision making that I’m about to describe. One of the most difficult tasks facing conservation biologists, as I have emphasized repeatedly, is that decisions must often, perhaps usually, be made in the face of woefully inadequate data.
(ba bla blaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa)
So.
From that incredibly dry mind numbing analysis of statistical decision theory they dropped this little bombshell in toward the end of the ‘how to use statistics’:
There is the recognition from statistics that there are two types of errors we can make in evaluating an hypothesis:
- We may say that something is happening when it isn’t (Type I), or
- We may say that something isn’t happening when it is (Type II).
Say what?
The capacity of the human mind for swallowing nonsense and spewing it forth in violent and repressive action has never yet been plumbed. – Robert Heinlein
(I wish I had written this in response to the statistical theory thingamajig)
Ok. What that means (to those of you solely dependent upon statistics). You may use the statistics to prove something is or isn’t happening … and it may not be happening or it is happening <anyone now wonder why statisticians are avoided?>.
Anyway. I will back off the ‘accountability through numbers folk’ for a second.
Trying to give statistical-using people the benefit of the doubt … let’s think that maybe when you are stressed out, frankly, any option seems pretty good … especially one which seems factual (numbers seem more factual to people … despite the fact that one you start combining them they become less factual).
I imagine it is like someone dying of thirst and drinking from whatever looks like the safest pool.
Uh oh. But some pools are poisoned.
And, unfortunately bout this stress theory of mine, when the adrenaline from the stress wears out, you realized that the statistics you leaned on for the decision YOU made were all bullshit (or someone points out they were bullshit when you actually invest some energy trying to explain them later).
And you are screwed.
Because of statistics (although people will inevitably try the “but the numbers told us what to do”).
Ok.
Here is the good news (relatively speaking). You can do something about the stress decision making leaning on numbers thing.
Most people, given enough experience, become aware that stress can do a number on your decision-making skills. How do I know? Well. Of course someone has done a study on it.
Scientists have some statistical based thinking about exactly how stress screws up your ability to make decisions.
According to ScienceDaily, psychologists Mara Mather and Nichole R. Lighthall (who completed a review of the literature on stress and decisions) they found that, even though you’d think being stressed would turn people into pessimists and therefore more careful … stress actually makes us focus too much on the upside of our decisions.
Says Mather, “Stress seems to help people learn from positive feedback and impairs their learning from negative feedback.”
Uh oh.
That sucks (maybe you cannot do something about the bad stress decision making thing). Nuts.
I guess my point in bringing up the study is that maybe under stress it is easier to grab on to statistics to make a decision <all the while thinking positive thoughts> and therefore avoided the judgment call on your own.
Uh oh (again).
Look.
I was wrong. You can do something about this judgment thing.
Judgment isn’t easy … but at some point you are accountable … or you should be … and hiding behind statistics just won’t hack it.
As Yoda would say “the answers are within you.”
The key to making a smart decision is giving yourself the time to gather all the information you need <and, yes, that can include statistics> and move forward with whatever proactive thinking method approach you have some confidence in … and make a decision.
A daunting decision doesn’t have to put you in an analysis paralysis death grip.
Use a logical decision-making method to help you evaluate your choices and pull the trigger.
And make a decision.
And not let statistics make the decision for you.
Here is the net on statistics: It helps us formalize and categorize our thinking to make sure that we have considered all relevant possibilities.
Quantitative analysis should be viewed as explorations of possibilities … not hard predictions.
I believe being able to use numbers, and statistics, to explore possibilities is truly a skill <or an art>.
Not everyone can do it. Ok. Well. That’s not true. Anyone can do it … it’s just that not everyone can do it well.
Knowing what to do with the numbers is an art.
In fact, just to circle back to the main topic of this post, let’s call it … well … judgment.
Yeah. Judging numbers. Weighing the importance of one number versus another as well as learning which numbers are unimportant.
And there are even fewer people who have mastered that art.
But. That doesn’t mean everyone should get bogged down in statistics and numbers because if you do, yup, you can torture any decision you want out of numbers.
And, frankly, you are lying to yourself if you believe that is a decision. That is simply being a coward (in the decision making world).
You have deferred decision to ‘numbers.’ And inevitably you are deferring accountability.
Sound harsh?
As harsh as this?
“I notice increasing reluctance on the part of marketing executives to use judgment; they are coming to rely too much on research, and they use it as a drunkard uses a lamp post for support, rather than for illumination.” - David Ogilvy
Harsh.
Sound like truth?
Yup.
marketing is evil?
Mar 27th
“What is the difference between unethical and ethical advertising? Unethical advertising uses falsehoods to deceive the public; ethical advertising uses truth to deceive the public.” – vilhjalmur Stefansson
Now.
Vilhjamur was a kick ass anthropologist (known for his description of the “Blond Eskimo” which is a Copper Inuit), his discovery of new lands in the Arctic, his approach to travel and exploration, and his theories of health and diet. And I am not sure what the hell he knew about advertising … but he did say this.
And because I opened with the quote let me address the whole marketing is evil (or ethical versus unethical) with this little “my point of view” overview.
I believe marketing people generally fall into three buckets.
- 1. Those who fabricate unimportant truths and tell you that they are important <these people are hacks and should be fired and told to pick up trash on the sides of highways>
- 2. Those who use existing unimportant truths and convince you that they are important <this is the largest group and will vary on a spectrum between those who do this knowingly – which puts them close to the highway garbage category – and those who are blissfully ignorant of what they are doing>
- 3. Those who take important truths and tell you that they are important <scarily this group may have the toughest job because we people are consistently uninterested in many important truths>
And it would be nice to suggest this is a simple 1 to 3 scale or, at minimum, a one to 5 scale. But I believe someone could quite successfully argue this three group scoring would be a 1 to 10 scale with lots of broadness in terms of interpretation and lots of caveats and excuses. And before any marketing person starts blathering about with caveats & excuses please make sure you read Bill Bernbach’s “Do this or Die” advertisement he wrote to advertising & marketing people (see marketing is evil part 2).
All that said … I empathize with people who suggest marketing is evil (evil being a broader term for “convincing people to buy shit they don’t really need or want to buy <before they saw the marketing>.”
I empathize because if I were to do some scoring I believe I would tend to see a lot of 4’s and 5’s.
I empathize because I just don’t see a lot of marketing that seems to approach selling stuff from a “what is in the best interest of the people” perspective.
Look.
I am all for capitalism and selling stuff … but a lot of marketing seems to lack a deeper moral/ethical substance. Not all … but some <a lot>.
And what makes it even more difficult to defend and discuss is that it is really difficult to put your finger on the core issue that seems to creep into the internal moral compass one would hope marketers would have.
Why? Because of what I called ‘unimportant truths versus important truths.’ Both of which are truths just with some interpretation issues thrown in to make it all fuzzy.
About marketing truths
A beginning thought:
“Record companies are in the marketing business. Fashion probably wasn’t evil before marketing people got involved and tried to invent themselves and sell it to America’s youth by convincing them that the rest of America’s youth was already partaking. Fashion probably began as a groundswell of beauty: the tribe enjoying the way the buildings look and music sounds, right now, in this moment. That’s valuable because it allows for substance to shift styles. But marketing will do anything to avoid substance and engage only in style. No longer beauty that falls from trees like apples, fashion becomes shiny, scary chemical candy, unnatural and unhealthy.” – Kristen Hersh
Ok.
How awesome and insightful is this thought?
There are so many great thoughts within it … well … it is scary.
‘fashion probably began as a groundswell of beauty.”
Think about this one. This is a big thought … much bigger than just about the fashion industry. Relevant to all of marketing. This whole thought revolves around substance versus style as the issue.
And suggests marketing has no substance … hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … or, maybe better said, it thrives less on substance than style.
Here is the bigger thought hidden in there … “valuable because it allows for substance to shift styles.”
So.
Substance creates beauty all on its own … and marketing creates style to showcase that which may, or may not, have substance. Or, as earlier noted, maybe marketing becomes dependent upon unimportant truths.
O, even worse, “created truths” (a creative way of saying ‘lies’).
Ok.
Does this alone make marketing evil? No. Ok, well, not all the time.
Because the key is substance.
And marketing truths.
Marketing has a habit of “creating truths.” Yeah … yeah .. yeah … someone is gonna come back and suggest “no, we aren’t creating truths … we are simply uncovering truths.”
Semantics.
Marketing is in the business of tearing apart the fabric of thought and identifying specific threads within the fabric that may be worth pointing out to people.
In the end? It is a thread. And not the fabric.
An example?
Let me try this on for an example:
“Stores Create More Holidays; Tissues Made for Summer, Pink Irons for Fall” (Wall Street Journal in august 2011)
People see 4 seasons (unless you live in California or the North Pole) but retailers see anywhere from 13 to 20 seasons. All designed to get shoppers into their stores and buy stuff.
The fabric? The season.
The threads? The 13 to 20 “seasons” retailers see.
Once again … is this evil, or lying, or even “unimportant truths”?
This is a really really gray area.
Creating more holidays. They are creating more sales … inevitably they are just trying to create more interest.
And they do all of this because retailers want impulse purchases (oh, by the way, which naturally happen to any of us … and marketing doesn’t create this … you <your own head> creates this).
Anyway. Suffice it to say what they do is try to get you in the store more often. Because the more often you visit the more likely you are to buy stuff.
And they do all of this quite thoughtfully.
So. Research says the average retail shopper visits a store once every two to three weeks. And shoppers go to the grocery store every seven to 10 days.
That means traditional retailers added grocery items hoping to make people make more frequent shopping trips.
Do I begrudge retailers this? Nope. They have a business to run.
And by being so “thoughtful” are they evil <in their quasi-manipulation of us shopping folk>? Nope.
And are they lying? Nope.
Let’s tear apart the fabric a little more.
Let’s try and and help you understand why there are a boatload of people out there who say marketing is evil.
Because this next example really starts talking about “unimportant truths” and, in the end, we are talking about some sense of mental manipulation.
Let’s look how they do it to see if its lying or evil … let’s look at a retailer’s 4, oops, 13 season year:
- Superbowl
- New Year’s Resolutions (January)
- Lawn and Garden (April)
- Back to School/College(July through August)
- Gifts for children; early entertaining décor (October, November)
- Last-minute gifts, stocking stuffers, food/entertaining (December)
- Health and Wellness January features exercise equipment, supplements and vitamins, items tied to shoppers’ New Year’s resolutions
- Spring (March to May) includes Easter, Graduation Day, Mother’s Day
- Pink/Women’s Health October includes displays of pink products and stores offer women’s health screenings.
- Fall Gatherings (Late September through November)
- ‘the day after Thanksgiving event,’ aka Black Friday. Includes gifts and splurge items. (November)
- Holiday Entertaining and Gifting (November, begins the day after black Friday)
- Organization and Storage(January)
(and I am sure I missed a couple in there … as well as I probably got some of the dates wrong … but … you get the point)
Why do they do this?
Research shows that people are usually willing to spend more during “special seasons.”
And even more dollars if they are spending on their children.
Look.
I don’t believe marketing is evil … but it is surely “wily smart” in that it is always seeking to find conscious or subconscious triggers to motivate behavior.
No.
Here is a truth.
Impulse or not … marketing cannot really make someone do something they don’t want to do.
And, in today’s world with return guarantees and such … it is almost next to impossible to maintain what could be construed as impulsive behavior decision (because it can so easily be “undone”).
Marketing is a business.
And you can certainly expect a retailer, and marketers, to make shopping as much of a science as possible.
And by “science” I mean by often “managing unimportant truths.”
In addition … they will build model stores, displays and end-caps (things at the end of the aisles) to see what makes people buy the most.
Once again, is that evil? Nope. It’s just being smart about your business.
In general I don’t think marketing is the embodiment of the Evil Empire.
I think most people just try to do the best they can.
Now. “The best” can be pretty bad at times.
Simplistically. Bad marketing is bad. And ignorance, or doing what you believe is the right thing to do, is no excuse for bad marketing or making the unimportant important.
Good marketing sells substance or (still good) expresses the existing emotional relationships people have with products.
On marketing’s good days it ultimately helps the best companies and products win over the bad stuff.
On marketing’s BEST days they actually get people to believe the important truths.
Next.
Evil: confusing evil messaging and evil actions
I brought up the unimportant versus important truths upfront because I believe marketing‘s evilness really should be defined by that. But. issues gets compounded not just by what they say but how and when they say it.
So beyond the message we shouldn’t get confused by marketer’s actions (which are not evil … just absurdly annoying … which I imagine could be construed as some level of evilness).
I do wish more marketers would pay attention to information available to them.
According to Pitney Bowes research, consumers surveyed in France, Germany, the UK and the U.S. have indicated which marketing activities draw them closer … and which act as a repellant.
If marketers would pay attention, people are quite clear about what they want from marketing interactions.
And if marketers would pay attention they would clearly see many of their actions are simply not having the intended effect.
Worse, inappropriate communications often diminish a brand’s attractiveness, thereby losing people’s interest and ultimately even existing customers opt out.
So. The good things? Customer satisfaction surveys. 75% were fine with them. Great opportunity for marketers to “not sell” but rather learn and create customized messaging/experiences based on each consumer’s preferences.
“This survey confirms that brands should listen to consumers before they send out their communications. Every interaction must honor the interests of the customer first, only then is a relevant offer or call to action acceptable to consumers. Each conversation between a brand and a customer is an opportunity to delight or disappoint. We’re all learning how to do more of the former and less of the latter.” – PitneyBowes Reasearch
On websites, 59% say they appreciate personalization such as “Welcome <name>.”
For transactional sites, especially where purchases are being made, it can be reassuring to know that the site recognizes your personal account details and has a record of interactions to draw upon.
Okay.
Now the annoying stuff. And where marketing, I believe, just doesn’t help itself.
Efforts which are meant to be inviting but are just plain irritating to most consumers.
- Asking customers to support a brand’s charity or ethical concerns (84%)
- Sending offers from third-parties (83%)
- Encouraging interaction with other consumers via an online community (81%).
Is this stuff evil? Of course not. But if you add these actions on top of the fact a marketer is most likely communicating an “unimportant truth” it is not only annoying but it is irrelevant. You have been intrusive and unimportant.
The double kiss of death.
Anyway.
Evil is always associated with people.
Truth or lie.
Annoying actions or relevant actions.
It all comes down to who is pulling the trigger.
And here is where marketing runs into its most trouble … marketing people.
Ok. Maybe it’s not the people … it’s just their common sense decision-making that seems to run into trouble.
All too often it seems the marketing people manage to run into troubling ethical dilemmas … and inevitably make some really bad, or certainly questionable, choices (with a consumer’s perspective in mind).
Most of the time these bad choices consist of less than the entire truth … or full disclosure of information the customer would want to know to make a reasonable decision. Let’s call this “selective truth telling.”
Or, as earlier pointed out, selecting one thread in the fabric to point out.
Or even “trying to convince you an unimportant truth is … well … impoartnt.” And, at its worst? Trying to convince you an unimportant truth is REALLY impoartnt.”
This is probably the best example of “the lie of silence.” (which I have written about before)
It’s all very tricky because most products & services tend to be good, useful products. And the ethical dilemma is how much information is it okay to hide <not tell> from the buyer to make a sale.
Oh.
Of which many marketers will hide behind the excuse “but we only have so much time to capture someone’s attention.”
Shame on those marketers.
You always have time to tell the important truth.
And, in your heart of hearts, a good marketer knows that honesty and important truths win in the long run.
In the end … I do believe the thought of marketing as evil (in a true sense) is absurd.
In an abstract sense (like Kristen mentions in her quote I used)?
Well. Possibly.
Evil is a strong word. It could be truly that marketing, when gone awry, can warp the true essence of the intent.
And that may seem evil but it is just wrong.
However.
Evil or not.
As a marketer myself … I would like to remind all marketers we have a responsibility. What we say and what we do DOES impact what people think … and ultimately can affect what they do.
With that ‘power’ comes a responsibility.
And it would be evil, yes, evil for us to forget that.
marketing is evil part 2
Mar 27th
This is a short followup. In part one I reference something Bill Bernbach wrote. An advertisement for advertising to advertising people.
It is something everyone in marketing & advertising should read. And ignore at your own peril.
Enjoy. It is called “Do this or Die.”
DO THIS OR DIE
Is this ad some kind of trick?
No. But it could have been.
And at exactly that point rests a do or die decision for American business.
We in advertising, together with our clients, have all the power and skill to trick people.
Or so we think. But we’re wrong.
We can’t fool any of the people any of the time.
There is indeed a twelve-year-old mentality in this country; every six-year-old has one.
We are a nation of smart people.
And most smart people ignore most advertising because most advertising ignores smart people.
Instead we talk to each other.
We debate endlessly about the medium and the message.
Nonsense. In advertising, the message itself is the message.
A blank page and a blank television screen are one and the same.
And above all, the messages we put on those pages and on those television screens must be the truth.
For if we play tricks with the truth, we die.
Now. The other side of the coin.
Telling the truth about a product demands a product that’s worth telling the truth about.
Sadly, so many products aren’t.
So many products don’t do anything better.
Or anything different.
So many don’t work quite right.
Or don’t last. Or simply don’t matter.
If we also play this trick, we also die.
Because advertising only helps a bad product fail faster.
No donkey chases the carrot forever.
He catches on. And quits.
That’s the lesson to remember.
Unless we do, we die.
Unless we change, the tidal wave of consumer indifference will wallop into the mountain of advertising and manufacturing drivel.
That day we die.
We’ll die in our marketplace.
On our shelves. In our gleaming packages of empty promises.
Not with a bang. Not with a whimper.
But by our own skilled hands.
Doyle Dane Bernbach Incorporated
the worst tourists in the world
Mar 23rd
So.
Before you think about traveling …. think about who you are going to travel with.
Me? I try and travel with no one (groupwise).
I love to travel to new places and I guess I do touristy things (some) but in general I kind of just like to blend in and get a feel for a place. That typically means avoiding some of the typical tourist places and absolutely means no guided tours and buses and groups.
I admit that I am absolutely positively 100% sure I miss things because of that.
And I am okay with that. Everything in life is a tradeoff.
This is one I make when I travel.
Some benefits?
Because of it though I met someone I dated for a while because I was so hopelessly lost in Paris she took pity on me.
I was asked by two Russians in a Ukrainian sauna (in bad English) to sneak into the women’s sauna and surprise their wives (I declined but was bought some of the best Russian vodka I have ever tasted).
Had pizza in a pool hall in Kiev.
Danced in a basement nightclub under a cathedral in St. Petersburg.
Was one of 250 people to see the Paris Symphony play in a small courtyard in Paris.
Went horseback riding with some kind of herders in Spain.
Spent Christmas day on a small sailboat in the middle of the Caribbean.
Will forever be known as Leon (as in The Professional) by a small group of people in Kiev (long story).
Anyway. Good stuff. Mostly because I try and not be a tourist tourist (you know what I mean).
This also means that regardless of where I go I will immediately go in the opposite direction as soon as I see a group of tourists. Any country’s tourists.
But especially Americans.
I have always kind of thought Americans were the worst tourists.
Worse than Germans (who typically seem to set the standard for worst).
Oh.
So here is the great factoid.
Americans ARE the worst tourists.
Even more interesting?
American tourists even THINK they are crappy tourists themselves (study conducted by marketing company Mandala Research).
During the study, 5,600 people from five countries were asked to describe their attitudes towards tourists from different countries.
It turned out that every fifth respondent said that U.S. citizens were “the worst tourists.”
Here is the funny part.
The majority of those who said Americans were the worst tourists were American citizens themselves.
Other interesting findings revealed in the survey show that:
- 19 percent of Americans have got hopelessly lost while on their foreign travels (I am in this group)
- 21 percent lost their luggage (interestingly I am not in this group)
- 3 percent got arrested (thankfully I am not in this group … but … well … suffice it to say being close is bad enough …)
- 7 percent overindulged on booze (geez … how can it ONLY be 7%????)
Russian tourists closed the top five, at #5 worst, of the worst tourists in the world.
#2?
Travelers from China. They were in second place in the ranking of the worst tourists in the world.
#3 belongs to tourists from France (which surprised me because they are typically so polite),
4 … Japanese tourists.
And # 5 were Russians.
The top ten included citizens of Korea, India, Germany, Spain and the UK.
Anyway.
The study was fascinating.
About 40% of American travelers said that they had stolen something from hotel rooms at least once.
(so not only are we crappy tourists but thieves as well ….)
What did we steal?
Towels (28 percent), bathrobes (8 percent), batteries (5 percent), pillows (4 per cent), TV remote controls (3 percent), sheets (3 percent), Bibles (3 percent) and umbrellas (3 percent).
Yikes.
So. If you steal a Bible … doesn’t that break a commandment (I am sometimes not clear on the commandments that were on the tablet Moses dropped and the ones he actually brought down the hill). Even if it doesn’t break a commandment I am fairly sure it breaks some “going to heaven or hell” rule.
And 7% complained that they had a headache and could not remember what happened to them after a wild party the night before. (awesome)
I don’t think there is a correlation to the headache and wild partying but the same number (7 percent) admitted that they could not find a bathroom when they needed it urgently.
Five percent of respondents mentioned they were bitten by bed bugs, or faced large-scale strikes or mass riots during their stay in foreign countries.
There you go.
Factoids for the week.
I fail, you fail, we all fail. Here is our tale.
Mar 14th
So.
I wanted to write something on failure and started … stopped … started again … stopped.
Well. I don’t know why but it was hard for some reason.
Harshly? I failed.
I failed at something I wanted to do. But. If creating a blog has taught me one thing <if that is at least one criteria of failing> that I fail constantly.
Little failures? Sure.
But a failure nonetheless.
Oh. And if you are not careful little failures are like dying a death of a thousand cuts.
Regardless.
That REALLY got me thinking about several things … the word failure (and how little it seems to be used these days) and failing itself & lessons and all that crap.
So I went hunting.
Hunting for some inspiration for the right words to say about failing and failure.
My first hunt.
Choose the Right Word by Hayakawa (almost my bible of word descriptions).
It didn’t fail me here.
“Failing” fell under Flaw <wow … I could write an entire book over that little insight>.
Flaw has a variety of aspects … blemish, defect, failing, fault, foible, imperfection, mar, shortcoming.
Regardless.
Failure is a reflection of a flaw.
An imperfection (which seems okay).
A defect (which seems not okay).
Is failure a reflection of a defective product <product being … well … us … a human … a person>?
That seems harsh. Ok. Maybe extreme.
But.
In terms of “truth to oneself” think about this … ‘imperfection’ points more often to a lack that may be a matter of opinion (Hayakawa).
Well. THAT certainly makes it easier to say “I am imperfect … I have failed.” Because, well, it is on a basis of opinion (and everyone has opinions).
Failure, on the other and, suggests a more severe shortcoming that has more severe consequences.
How ‘bout that?
There is some tough love.
The word failure is tough love.
A severe shortcoming.
And if you have a shortcoming … well … there are consequences. In fact … more severe consequences.
And maybe in this politically correct world we want to soften up things a little … and we don’t ‘fail’ but rather we made a mistake or took a step on the path to success or whatever.
Maybe it is better to just say we failed at something.
I don’t know.
But I do believe we should be better at admitting failure. I believe it should be more acceptable to say “you failed” <without it being construed in a negative way>.
I do believe we should be better at understanding we have failings … and they have consequences.
Now. Notice. Hayakawa never, anywhere, attached “negative” or “bad” adjectives to consequences. He simply points out that failures suggest shortcomings leading to consequences.
And that, my friends, is a Life truth … and more people <in my eyes> should just step up to the plate and accept that truth without all the suggestions that they keep you from being a successful or ‘whole’ person.
We fail. And maybe it is because of some shortcoming and absolutely I am assuming that shortcoming will create at least one dead end in your life (toward some success). But it doesn’t mean that it keeps you from some other path to success.
It does not mean you are a failure. It just may mean you have failed, and you may fail consistently, if you pursue that path.
Ok.
Next.
And when I went hunting I found a blog focused solely on failure. And it wasn’t bad or negative or even totally depressing.
Now. It certainly wasn’t uplifting by any stretch of the imagination but it was kind of an interesting glimpse into what I assume was a normal every day woman kind of getting a grip on life.
And this blog is her way of doing it … by embracing failure (she actually has a post called “why have a blog about failure?”: http://soyoufailed.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/why-have-a-blog-about-failure/)
As she says in her ‘about me’ section:
Who am I?
- I am female
- I’m in my mid 30′s
- I live in the Bay Area, California
- My day job is as a User Experience Designer (my 24 hour/day job is “failure” 
)
- I am a mother of 2 beautiful boys
- My “other” interests besides failure are photography, learning to play the guitar, and user experience design.
I loved it.
“my other interests beyond failure …” Nice perspective.
The site has glimpses of insight <albeit I wonder if writing nonstop about failure is completely healthy>. And while absolutely focused on failure, which I equate to a songwriter trying to write every song about a falling star <or God>, there are truly some nice perspectives on failing.
And all written from an everyday perspective.
Anyway.
About a failure <she says as one of 5 things> …
5. You learned something.
And that’s what life is all about. Learning something. In failing you probably learned something about yourself, about someone else, about a situation, about how to do something better next time. Failing is so valuable. Don’t focus on the failure. Focus on what you got from that failure.
So go ahead, fail on!
(nice closing line by the way)
Life is about learning.
Life is about failure.
I imagine the corollary thought would be “how boring would life be if we never failed?” there is such a stigma attached to failure … and the word itself. In fact, to be politically correct, I probably shouldn’t use the word failure.
It would be “trial & error” (what a bunch of bullhockey).
Look.
We fail.
And it’s okay to fail.
And it’s even okay to fail on some of the really Big things in life. Not that you try to … just that … well … we do.
It is called Life.
- Marriages fall apart even when you don’t really want them to.
- You try to win a game but you don’t.
- You try and lose those 10 pounds and you don’t.
- You try and be the best friend you can but miss when a good friend needs you.
Some are big things. Some are small things.
But all ‘things’ examples of failing at something.
And, once again, that’s okay. It’s cool.
You aren’t a failure just because you failed.
And that is a big, no HUGE, distinction.
You aren’t a failure … unless … you don’t pay attention to #5 (you learned something). You just failed.
Because, in fact, some failures are just part of life.
Maybe these are “failings” rather than failures but … well … whatever. Semantics.
I guess my point here is don’t aim to fail <as if any of us actually would, huh?> but recognize you do fail. And accept it IS failing.
Lastly.
Here is a great example of how failure … well … happens. And we (who are perfect of course) looking at failure happening right before our eyes … need to be very very <very> careful in our judgement with regard to failings and failure.
Let me give you a really big example … a really good one … which was part of this whole ‘failure’ blog:
… my crisis started. I had reached a point where I just could not figure out what to do. I was crying and weeping and just could not calm myself down. I got to the point when I had to ask myself, “What will make you sane and get you through this moment? What will keep you from killing yourself right now?” And to me, and it is a different thing for everybody, smoking had always been the thing that I turned to when I got to such a low point. It was what got me to calm down and take a moment and just be present. For some it could be a stiff drink, a dozen donuts, or a shopping spree. For me it was smoking. So I did it. I failed my abstinence. I went to the closest Walgreens, bought a pack, and smoked a cigarette.
And I admit, I failed even more and bought two more packs to get me through lower lows these past few months. I gave myself a break. I thought, it is better to have a crutch to get through these horrible days, than to be perfect and not have a crutch and go crazy. I took it easy on myself, I “failed” myself. Or more like I let myself have what I needed. I think at some point in our lives, when we need to, we should give in to ourselves. In our darkest times, we need to stop and think about what we need to get us through it. If you need to spend $1000 on clothing to save yourself, do it.
But know when it is time to stop. Know when the break needs to be over. Know when the fail needs to stop. For me that break is over now. I need to stop smoking now, before it becomes a full blown addiction again. Before it spirals out of control. Now it is becoming less helpful and is on the brink of being harmful. And so, while it is still easy to stop, I have stopped. I no longer need my crutch. It has done its job. It has gotten me through my darkest times.
I hope that for you, when you are going through a tough time, that you are able to stop and think about what crutch you need to get you through, and that you let yourself have that and let yourself fail. But I also hope that at some point, when you are healed, you are able to gracefully lay the crutch down.
Big thought in there.
“In our darkest times, we need to stop and think about what we need to get us through it. If you need to spend $1000 on clothing to save yourself, do it.
But know when it is time to stop. Know when the break needs to be over. Know when the fail needs to stop.”
Failing always needs context.
No. It doesn’t need excuses … just context.
I wrote about this kind of thing over a year ago … I stated there and then I was wrong … wrong in a way that this blogger said it best.
Here is what I said: http://brucemctague.com/doubt-part-3-crushed-between-internal-and-external-doubt
(the key words from that post)
Do what it takes to keep it alive. Keep your sense of I and don’t lose it.
Whatever it takes.
Let me repeat.
Whatever it takes.
In the past I have judged people who have leaned on religion. Leaned on prescription drugs. Leaned on self help books. Leaned on betterment programs.
Well. I have been a fool.
And ignorant.
A stupid ignorant fool.
For whatever path one chooses to maintain their flame is the right path. And a good path. And a path well taken.
You do whatever it takes to keep the flame alive and don’t get crushed by doubt. That’s it. Bottom line.
I didn’t know better words at that time but in my head I saw some things as “failings”, or failure, in people and was making my own judgments on their actions.
Look.
We have rules. We have guidelines. We have distinctions between what is right and wrong. And if we don’t meet them we ‘fail.’
Yes. All of that is true.
Yet.
In dark times … you have to do whatever you have to do to cross that dark bridge.
Whatever. Even if it means ‘failing’ in some form or fashion. Even if it means that it LOOKS like failure in someone else’s eyes.
The blogger is right.
It is okay to fail.
Failing does not make you a failure.
By the way …. Here is the site:
I fail, you fail, we all fail. Here is our tale.
project global generation enlightened update
Mar 6th
So.
Here is what I hope to do that will “echo in eternity.”
Project Global Generation.
I have updated project global generation, about 75+ pages of it, with sources including TED, The Economist, Time Magazine, multiple foreign education programs (including Singapore & Korea), PewResearch, UNESCO and additional research studies … all as best I can.
www.projectglobalgeneration.com
I would have had to rewrite complete posts if I wanted to eliminate all redundancy (and … sigh … I was not up to the task) so most articles were updated to insure they had the most up-to-date thoughts.
Why update now? Time magazine had two recent articles on web based education.
“… hopes that the internet can improve teaching may at last be bearing fruit” – Time Magazine (Flipping the Classroom) 9/17
“… many people now believe that the internet can make a real difference educating children.” – Time Magazine (The Great Schools Revolution) 9/17
Maybe I am not as nuts as I thought I was (at least with regard to this idea).
Since 2008 or 9 I have been writing about Project Global Generation – a web based global children’s education initiative (and I am probably done because re-reading everything I am not sure I can write anything new or prove why it is a good idea and it is the time to do it).
Most people thought the idea was nuts … okay … they just thought (a) teaching via web was not going to be effective <in school hands on teaching was best> and (2) it wasn’t practical to implement <they couldn’t envision how it could actually happen>.
Maybe some people don’t think it’s that nuts anymore.
Regardless. I still believe it is a good idea.
If you want everything from strategy underpinnings, rationale, specific tactics, implementation plan of action and real costs, the project global generation website has it all.
Read it if you are interested.
Forward it to anyone you believe would be interested in it.
And.
If this isn’t your thing … please … at minimum … be interested in kid’s education.
Someday we will be dependent on them.
So. Care now.
And.
If you elect to visit the site here is what you will find. Here is the table of contents:
- About Project Global Generation
The welcome to the site and why I created this idea/initiative.
- Table of contents and summary
If you read only one thing this would be it. Right here (this post is the contents/summary). A cliff notes version of everything you can find on the site.
- 1. global generation: dawn of enlightened individuality (the global generation)
using a variety of sources I outline what I believe the generation after the Millennials, called The Global Generation, will look like attitudinally and how they ‘fit’ in the cycle of generations.
- 1a. The global generation student: about their abilities & attitude
using a Fischler study and the Singapore Ministry of Education I try and overcome some misperceptions about the abilities and attitudes of a younger generation of students
- 2. global generation: a look at millennials (and why they are not the global generation)
in this post I take a deeper dive into why I believe the Millennials will end up facilitating the Global Generation opportunity and not be the generation that will impact education & enlightened conflict directly.
- 3. global generation: sociology & the internet platform
there are some inherent sociological benefits to a we based education initiative and in this post I outline them.
- 4. global generation: developing critical thinking skills
in this post I outline how the Global generation, facilitated by a web based program, will be the greatest critical thinking generation we have seen.
- 5. global generation: education messaging underpinnings
in this article I outline the specifics of what makes up the educational aspects (and what does not).
- 6. global generation: learning by lurking
in addition to the sociological benefits as outlined in GG 3 we have seen some possible improvements a web based model can offer to learning/education.
- 7. global generation: tactics & implementation
after outlining the thinking behind the initiative in this post I outline the specific tactics & costs.
- 8. global generation: the role of the web (versus existing education systems)
in this post I outline the benefits of using a web based model for education trying to explain why flipping the existing education model is better and more practical for the future generations
- global generation 9: measuring the initiative impact (attitudinally and global attendance)
now that I have outlined the thinking behind the program, the specific tactics & costs to implement I suggest measurement objectives and will also using the most recent UNESCO global education report I outline how the initiative will assist in reaching the UN Millennium goals.
- 10. global generation: more on impact – conflict & enlightenment
Using an article from The Economist I outline how the initiative impacts value systems
- 11. global generation: implementing a conflict prevention program
I compare the initiative against other existing global initiatives to outline how this initiative will be more effective than most other programs because it affects ongoing behavior as a ‘preventative’ initiative rather than a ‘intervention’ type program
- 12. global generation: not too close a link to human rights
I outline my thoughts that this initiative is an education program and not a Human rights program and part of its challenge is to not judge different cultural/governmental/religious systems but rather through education there is a high potential for a stronger tolerance of different views as the generation moves into adulthood.
Some additional conclusion thoughts:
- global generation finds a voice
A number of well known celebrities have stepped forward to discuss the importance of improving education globally. In this article I highlight the “free your mind” award and spectacularly articulated award speech from an unlikely source – Jared Leto of 30 Seconds to Mars
- Thomas Jefferson on Ignorance and Enlightened Conflict
using some Thomas Jefferson thoughts I leave you with some more philosophical ‘bigger picture’ things to ponder.
- me and my thoughts on conflict & people
just some last thoughts … because this is all about enlightened conflict anyway …
That’s it.
Oh. Why do I care?
“What we do in life echoes in eternity.”
you don’t know jack
Mar 1st
So.
Every once in a while you actually receive a sales driven email that is worth a shit.
I received one from The Futures Company (it used to be called Yankelovich and please don’t ask me why they change their name).
They called it the “you don’t know Jack <about multicultural marketplace> quiz.”
And, you know, I don’t know jackshit about the multicultural marketplace.
And I bet you don’t either.
Regardless.
Take the quiz.
Here it is:
How much do your know about the Multicultural Marketplace?
The Futures Company challenges you to find out exactly how much you know (or don’t know) about the multicultural marketplace.
Heapsongs
Feb 24th
So.
Imogene Heap continues to convince me she must be an incredibly interesting person in person … as well as a talented musician. And she just released another new song … from China.
Think of this:
Featured on TED (magical gloves <that capture sound through motion>).
Finds musical inspiration in almost absurd ways (newspaper printers).
Innovative thinker (YouGov).
Certainly not mainstream (I envision most people have no clue who she is). But certainly way ahead of what I would consider a global collaborative thinker (not just a musician).
First. The song.
Heap is working on her fourth cd. But she is going about it in a really interesting way … it is almost like sh is releasing each song as a “cd” as she rolls out the entre cd one-by-one. While the cd will be a collection of songs written and released individually two months apart each “Heapsong” is a story in itself. As I just said … each song is almost its own cd. People should be paying attention to is concept … REALLY paying attention. Because this may be the way of the future. Full length cds simply being a means to an end (a compilation of individual songs).
The newest song, the 5th, she made in China and is called Xizi She Knows: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgvAx2Bdt-o&ob=av2e
Ok. About the song (and another reason why I think she is one of the most innovative musicians out there today):
We went into a primary school class, where the children were doing their eye exercises, and the teacher giving them their instructions gave us our tempo. The sound of the newspaper printing presses – that became the beat. And we caught this woman who heads up this huge hill to a temple every day at sunrise and screams at the top of her lungs, so the sound of that is now in the middle section of the song.- Imogene Heap
Next.
She worked with YouGov to conduct a unique piece of research.
Imogen wanted to find out more about her fans by working with YouGov to write a tailored survey. Through it, she hoped to discover how her fans first came into contact with her work, when, how and why they enjoy her music, and what it is about Heap fans as individuals that mean they connect with her sound. It is a fascinating way to stay in touch with not only fan base but a larger base of what I would consider ‘global influencers’ or, at minimum, people who care about issues globally.
YouGov mapping of HeapFans
YouGov Heap: http://labs.yougov.co.uk/news/2012/02/14/imogen-heap-results/
Oh.
By the way.
Every one of my readers (because I assume they read because they like to explore new ideas and be involved in a worldview) should register with YouGov.
While it is certainly UK based it explores global issues as well as UK issues and is really well done. A very easy way to keep in touch with a variety of global issues (and some are serious and some are not).
Here is the registration site: https://labs.yougov.co.uk/account/register/
Next.
I love the fact she has made new technologies and social media integral to who she is and what she does … WITHOUT losing her individualism.
Heck. in 2010 she accepted her Grammy for the best engineered non-classical album (there are so many frickin’ grammy categories its nuts) wearing an interactive Twitter dress <yeah … interactive> specially-made to enable her to ‘bring’ her fans on stage with her.
And.
She has been featured on TED as assisting in the development of “magical gloves” which capture sounds in motion.
I love the fact she is recognizing the importance and functionality of social media as a vehicle for, and measure, of not only engagement but also the possibilities created through collaboration by constantly involving people with various projects.
I have written about her before an this 4th cd but it us using an entirely new innovative approach to writing & recording by releasing one song every three months … because each song is basically being created through collaboration in a two-week song-composing flurry.
‘Lifeline’ and ‘Propeller Seeds’ were the first and second tracks created this way.
For ‘Propeller Seeds’, Imogen invited fans to share their moments of ‘clarity’ with her – namely, the times in their lives when “everything seemed to click” – to inspire her interpretation of this moment in her music.
Anyway.
Fascinating young lady.
And, from a bigger picture perspective, I believe her efforts and working style actually does more to encourage arts & music in people’s lives than any “music & arts is good” advertising initiative. She is involving people … and young people to see how music can be part of their lives.
Here is the Guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2012/feb/23/30-minutes-with-imogen-heap#1
And if you ever wanted to be part of a song writing process … well … here is your chance. Her cd ain’t done yet.
Enjoy.
