Posts tagged project global generation
cell phones and 8 year olds
May 14th
“Adults — digital natives or not — can’t imagine what a childhood mediated by mobile, social technology that didn’t exist 10 years ago is actually like.” – Senior editor The Atlantic magazine
I admit.
Technology has created a significant new challenge to parenting. I struggle to think of anything since the printing press that would affect parenting as much as technology <smartphones, cell phones, i-pads, etc.> is doing.
Television was different (it’s not portable).
Cars was different (cannot drive until 16).
Anyway.
3rd grade children are, on average, eight years old.
20% of 3rd grade boys and 18% of 3rd grade girls already have a cell phone <2011 Massachusetts study of elementary, middle, and high school students>.
By the time children reach 5th grade, 39% of the kids have cell phones.
More than 83% of the students have a cellular device by middle school.
I have mixed feelings.
And frankly its not because of kids having access to this technology at too young an age … its more because of the quote I began with … we <older folk> cannot imagine a childhood mediated by technology.
And because we cannot imagine it … we have a propensity to limit it.
We all focus on ‘my kid is attached to their cell phone’ or ‘all they do is text’ or <fill in the blank>.
Is that wrong?
Geez. Parts of it doesn’t sound wrong and yet parts of it does sound wrong … because they are already living in a world I struggle to even imagine.
And <to increase the challenge> I cannot even come close to imagining what their adult world will look like.
Part of me thinks it is silly to restrict their usage of something that is already integral to today’s world.
Another part of me understands that we adults <including teachers and the overall education system> are not set up to manage their usage (unless we use guidelines from our own youth … which seems unbelievably silly).
Regardless.
I have another post where I will note the increasing % of children below the age of 5 using computers <there are even kindergartens that have this now> to learn.
I have had multiple debates with other TED participants with regard to the ultimate effect on cognitive learning <I am on technology’s side and I am in a minority>.
It is a whole new world.
And while we older folk may try and keep up with the technology we run the risk of not keeping up with our children’s’ world.
No. I don’t have an answer.
Yes. I do believe we adults need to come up with an entirely new set of ‘rules’ that will make us feel incredibly uncomfortable in dealing with our children.
Here is what I do know.
It will not be long before that 83% having cellular devices will be at the 3rd grade level.
It will not be long before over 80% of ALL children (any age … including less than 5) will have access to the internet.
We either need to accept it and do something to take advantage of it or we run the risk of creating the largest generational gap <and ensuing friction> since maybe age of the printing press.
Oh.
One day after I published the first version of this post I received the new Economist and had to add the following letter to the editor to my post:
SIR – Your special report <the third industrial revolution> is a warning bell for America’s outdated education system. Digital technology surrounds every facet of our lives. But when children walk into school they are usually told to give up the tools that power this new digital revolution and travel back in time to the days of Henry Ford’s factories. Indeed, classrooms in 2012 would seem normal to students in 1912: a teacher at the front, a board behind her to write on, two dozen children lined in rows who come and go as the proverbial steam whistle lets them know their shift is over.
We left that world a long time ago, and the customised and innovative tools of digital learning are long overdue in our education system. The disruptive nature of the digital revolution may bring more prosperity than either of its predecessors, but if the West cannot change its 19th-century model of education we will cede this wealth to others.
ADAM PESHEK
American Legislative Exchange Council
Washington, DC
True, so true. We need to leave a world behind and need to make the changes that will make us feel uncomfortable … but needed.
augmented reality
May 14th
Augmented reality is … well … a reality.
Augmented Reality: engineers are pulling graphics out of your television screen or computer display and integrating them into real-world environments. This new technology, called augmented reality, blurs the line between what’s real and what’s computer-generated by enhancing what we see, hear, feel and smell.
On the spectrum between virtual reality, which creates immersive, computer-generated environments, and the real world, augmented reality is closer to the real world. Augmented reality adds graphics, sounds, haptic feedback and smell to the natural world as it exists.
Ok.
And I will be the first to admit, as a quasi-marketing person, marketing is already making a hash of it <abusing it, misusing it, etc. it>.
Regardless. I see lots of possibilities with augmented reality mostly in that it provides an opportunity to add dimension to whatever story someone is telling.
The story could be a children’s story.
It could be a ‘product’ story. It could be a presentation story. It can enhance ANY story.
With that in mind the following link takes you to an incredibly appropriate use of augmented reality to enhance a story. Please don’t be fooled that it is so good just because it has to do with magic … the idea can add magic to any presentation and/or story.
Imagine any presenter, doesn’t have to be a CEO, presenting with this type of presentation.
Imagine a marketing message being given this way.
Imagine a class being taught this way.
Here you go (this is awesome):
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/marco_tempest_a_magical_tale_with_augmented_reality.html
Hope you enjoyed.
And hope you recognize that augmented reality technology is here … now.
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.
what will become of us?
Apr 13th
“because of you the days to come will be better than the days before this one.”
So.
I have been participating in another TED discussion with regard to the youth and education and a distressingly pessimistic view of who they will be and what they will become <a post/rant/observation is forthcoming on that soon>. That discussion has certainly made me sit back and think. And much of it has also clearly brought to the forefront why the project global generation web based education initiative has not gained traction.
Anyway. All the pessimism reminded me of something I had read.
Because sometimes you read something that is almost so perfect that you want to store it away and use yourself at some later date.
Thankfully I have a blog where I can write them down and post them so when I want to use it I can just send someone a link.
This is about telling a child what they can expect from life.
What will become of us? (asked the children to her mother) …
—-
“What I imagine is that you will live magnificent lives.
And that you will live lives of quiet disappointment.
You won’t be able to explain why. But there will always be some failure. You will strive for greatness and justice and you will help to make our nation wondrous.
You will be great but you will also fail at many of the things dearest to you.
And people – even ones you love – will disappoint you.
You will know great loves and you will have dear friends and you will be part of something bigger than you.
You will never be alone. And yet some of those you hold dearest will betray you, envy you over things they perceive you have that they do not. At times – even within a crowd and noise – you will feel strangely lost.
You will find gifts that are special to you but you will never understand why such things were thrust upon you.
You may curse the world for always spinning never pausing and yet this motion will be the music to which you dance.
In the end, I hope, you will come to feel that none of the life you lead could have been any different, any better or worse. You will find meaning in accepting many things you cannot understand or change. And if you live a long life you will grow tired and that will be alright because you will have done the best you can do during your lives.
You will take into the future all that has ever been for us. Because of you the days to come will be better than the days before this one.” – Mena Akaran
Can you ever imagine telling a child anything better?
“because of you the days to come will be better than the days before this one.”
Every child should hear this.
And, frankly, I wish more people would feel this way about our youth rather than bitching about what they are not or what they cannot do.
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
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.”
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.
fearless & young people & hook in your head
Feb 23rd
“Guess I need to unhook these thoughts.”
- Throwing Muses lyric from ‘hook in your head’
Ok.
I began writing this to remind us that young people are smarter and more innovative than we give them credit for as well as we typically have to look to the youth for trends and what the horizon has in store for us (whether we like it or not).
Oh. And this is is also just a reminder to us old folk how short our memories are.
So I began this with lyrics from a Throwing Muses song because it was written by Kristen Hersh (maybe 20 at the time) and Tonya Donnelly (maybe 20 at the time). And I used music as an example because … well … that’s what I do.
Two young 20somethings from Rhode Island creating things that would influence musicians for decades.
That said. I will say that aging, getting older, is consistent.
We begin to doubt that which we believed in when we were younger.
So this is a reminder.
Since I read Rat Girl it has re-instilled my belief that the youth is our future.
And the early 90s provides some good proof. And the Throwing Muses are proof. And Kristen Hersh (and Tanya Donnelly who has made every band she has played in sound awesome … not only did she co-found Throwing Muses with stepsister Kristin Hersh but then went on to work in The Breeders and Belly).
Anyway.
Hook in your Head is proof.
The song isn’t for everyone.
But it is a spectacular piece of song writing. In its 6:30+ length it is kind of 3 different songs.
In my words … it is a “clean messy” song.
(definition: the constant incredibly hooky rolling bass and drum riff is clean allowing Tonya and Kristen to be spectacularly messy).
Hook in Her Head remains one of my favorite Throwing Muses songs of all time (and no it isn’t a real hook it is something that is just stuck, or hooked, in your head).
Certain things I love, Spend my time
I guess I’ll have to unhook those hooks
This woman literally
Felt she had a hook in her head
When I first heard the song I listened to it … and listened to it over and over. Typical of the Muses it was odd … a fusion of alternative sections in one song(within 6:32). It has a brilliant drum steadying it with an awesome rolling bass riff holding it together.
And all the rest is messy.
But it sounds messy great.
The song is “ridiculously intense” as one commenter suggests (this is a live version but an almost perfect rendition of what you would hear on The Real Ramona): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcnDsTpO-CY&feature=related
And, most importantly, it is timeless (you could play this on any current alternative radio station I will guarantee multiple calls will come in asking who the heck the band was).
And they were teen-young 20’s defining a future sound.
Unpopular then? Sure.
Fearless ? Sure.
Young? You bet.
Old people hated it? Absolutely.
Acceptable today? It is what all alternative does and sounds like.
Truth? <as in “what can we learn” truth>
The youth are fearless and therefore, inevitably, they are influencers. Oh. Influencers of not only their own generation but of everyone.
At least everyone who pays attention.
At least to everyone who would quit bitching for “the good old days.”
And we shouldn’t forget it.
And any time us old folk do forget this I encourage you to go back to your youth and take a good hard look, and listen, and remind yourself.
And, frankly, we should remind ourselves more often.
Because too many of us are pretty frickin’ stubborn about today’s youth (and how irresponsible and immature we are so sure they are).
I have one suggestion for the old folk (say 40+).
Get your head out of your ass.
Young people are smart.
And they are innovative.
And, yeah, some of the innovations are aggravating … but we are supposed to be mature enough to delineate between “aggravating because it is simply aggravating” and “aggravating because now I am going to have to change.”
And, frankly, young people think of things we older people not only don’t – but can’t.
And if you ignore it or dismiss it (teen thinking) you are going to miss out on a lot.
Maybe worse?
You will have failed that generation. The young’s innovative thinking should be nurtured and fertilized like young plants that you want to blossom. For like flowers or trees they are the foliage that will line our horizons in the future.
If we kill their ideas our horizons will lie barren. Or worse. Our horizons will be lined in our ideas. And while we may be comforted in the sight of things we have created we are leaving nothing for future generations to look to on the horizon as their own.
(sorry … I felt kind of poetic as I banged away on the keys … ignore that bad imagery but accept the point … please)
Anyway.
Here is a thought for you as you think about today’s young people.
The Throwing Muses weren’t ahead of their time.
They were at their time.
But originality is often unpopular.
Play their music today and they would be a top 10 alternative band.
Does that mean they missed out? Nope.
Because they created. They were influential. They were a voice of the youth innovators of that generation.
Ignore the Throwing Muses music if you want.
But don’t ignore the youth.
Nurture the voices of this generation. Don’t mute them in your non understanding of what they say.
Just because originality is unpopular doesn’t mean we should discourage originality.
No matter what age the originality occurs.
Bottom line?
Unhook those thoughts from your head about young people.
voices of a generation
Feb 21st
Well.
This is about teens and what they are thinking and how the respond to reading <or claims they are not reading> and, frankly, a view from their perspective. And I am going to use their words. I am gonna use a lot of their words.
I am going to do this one in parts. First. A website dedicated to giving voice to teens globally. Second. Some response comments pulled from an article written … well … I cannot remember. Suffice it to say the article was from a reputable publication and the article was a bunch of moronic drivel written by an old guy waxing on about how this generation of young people are missing out on what his generation did (mostly reading) and are turning out to be a generation of illiterate mindless dweebs (sorry … it probably wasn’t that bad but you get the point).
I get tired of this (bashing today’s youth).
So … the first. The voice of the global teen. A blog created and written by teens. As a good friend of mine said “it is humbling.” Beyond that it is smart, insightful and extremely well articulated. And if anyone tries to tell me that this is a minority from a generation made up of a majority of morons I respond with a simple “bullshit.”
All generations think thoughts. But all generations have individuals who give voice to those thoughts. In fact all generations need an articulate few to create the voice of a generation.
Here is the site: http://voicesofyouth.org/users/11472
If you have any doubts that this generation doesn’t “get it” you can read the words of the younger generation globally right here … in one spot.
Do not doubt for one minute they are not extremely qualified to step into our shoes if not throw away our shoes and do us even better.
Second.
Reading.
Whew. This is one never ending gripe from old folk.
So I will begin with reading and literacy and … well … books, e-books and whatever else you want to consider reading.
Here is how one teen responds:
A major source of confusion is the fact that information from reputable sources is increasingly available on the Internet, which is far more convenient to use than hauling your ass to a library, browsing through the book collection, finding a giant tome, browsing through it to find what you need, and then rinse and repeat.
We’re keeping up with the modern world. And we’re definitely reading. We’re just not reading on physical paper, which is apparently a crime against humanity or something.
Hell, we’re reading plenty of things on physical paper too. Just not what we “should” be reading according to these “Damned-Whippersnappers”-crying adults. We’re reading not only fiction and fantasy (Harry Potter, Hunger Games, etc.), but also memoirs (The Glass Castle and Night) and many other genres.
We’re reading, just not what and how you think we should – GuywiththeContacts commenter
(amen)
Look.
I have read Hunger Games (a youth book … and I am looking forward to the movies) … the Immortal Nicholas Flamel book series (an excellent smart series) as well as I rarely read a newspaper anymore … oops … rather I read newspaper online. And, in fact, I probably read a wider variety of opinions and articles because I gather information online versus one paper newspaper than ever before.
So maybe I am also ‘just not reading what and how you think I should.’ Uh oh. I guess that means I owe an apology to the 50000 some people who visit my site each month.
Aw.
Bullshit.
Guywithcontacts is right. We adults need to stop crying. Reading (and writing maybe even more so) is alive and well. And prospering.
And the world is not losing its moral foundation nor is it crumbling …
Is Western Civilization coming to an end again? So soon after the last time? Actually, this article made me nostalgic for all of the other times Western Civilization was on its last legs. The symptoms are always the same – teenagers are distracted, can’t pay attention, and don’t have patience or empathy. The cure is always the same – read more, especially books from the canon. But the cause is different each time.
Remember when it was Facebook and Twitter that was going to bring us to an end? And before that, it was the internet? And before that, it was MTV? Before then, I think the culprit was supposed to be blockbuster movies (for killing our imaginations and preventing us from reading). Before that, it was television. And before that it was comic books. Then radio, movies, jazz, and vaudeville. And dime novels. And let’s not forget the assembly line and the automobile. All of them were, at one time or another, the cause of the demise of our culture.
I also recall, when I was a teenager, being told that I was the reason Western Civilization was doomed. Because all teenagers would lack the wisdom and common sense necessary to function. I heard the story about the high school student who hadn’t been aware that the U.S. and Japan had once been at war. “Who won?” she asked. I heard the story about the teenagers who saw a movie poster for “Amadeus” and wondered to each other who wrote the soundtrack. They sounded like jokes to me, but were presented as Actual Facts by adults. All it taught me at the time was that: (a) adults could be awfully credulous at times; and (b) backhanded put-downs weren’t much of an inducement to read more. But articles like this one are never aimed at the teenagers who are putting Western Civilization in peril. They are aimed at people who want to rail at the annoying, careless behavior of those who are just beginning to acquire the means to act independently, when carelessness or obnoxiousness could actually do someone harm. I propose that Newsweek retitle this article, “Kids today!” and leave it at that.
That being said, I have found texting to be both useful and terribly, terribly annoying. It depends on the context. – Maura commenter
(amen)
Get on the train or get run over by the train.
This generation is going to be managing our future one day.
Quit bitching.
If our generation didn’t kill civilization no generation will be able to. We have certainly done our best to do so … therefore … maybe this generation will pull our proverbial asses out of the fire and make all good as it should be.
But, as Maura so rightfully points out, ‘backhanded put downs are not an inducement’ for anyone to want to do anything.
This generation is not going to destroy civilization they are going to rebuild, recreate and renovate civilization. That said … we adults better quit bitching about reading and make sure we let them learn the good stuff any way they want.
Yeah.
Any way they want …..
“I’m so incredibly tired of everyone railing my generation for using the technology available to us. Yeah, cell phones allow us to communicate with each other easier. Awesome. That’s why they were invented. And the reason we use them a lot isn’t because the act of typing a message on a tiny keyboard gives us some immeasurable thrill. It’s because there’s someone on the other end whom we care about and want to be in contact with. Text-speak just makes things go faster. Is there anyone who honestly thinks that there are teenagers out there who don’t know how to spell ‘you’?
It’s like Maura said– you don’t think your parents said the same things about you? And their parents about them and on and on until you get back to neanderthals and the invention of the wheel. It’s just scapegoating and fear of change. It’s old news, buddy.
Also, I don’t hear people complaining about how Facebook and Twitter led an entire region to overthrow tyranny and oust dictators. Someone who did a great job of finding the real heart of the problem– and not maligning technology and advancement–was Ray Bradbury in Fahrenheit 451.
So please, stop accusing teenagers of destroying the world before we’re even allowed to vote, and quit blaming my generation for things we haven’t even gotten the chance to do yet (such as, you know, spike the US deficit to over a trillion). – chrissy a commenter on a site
(amen)
In the end … maybe let’s try some of these words on for size and today’s youth …
Resilience.
Adaptability.
Innovative.
Optimistic.
Yeah. Optimistic. Instead of cynicism … which seems to appear in older generations … this youth remains optimistic.
Think about this … a Pew survey found most young adults today believe they have a harder time than their parents did:
- 82% say it’s harder to find a job.
- 75% say it’s harder to save for the future.
- 71% say it’s harder to pay for college.
- 69% say it’s harder to buy a home.
<note: I tend to believe ALL younger generations believe they will have a more difficult time then their parents.> Yet. Despite all of that … the same Pew study found high levels of optimism among young adults. Although the survey found young people are less likely now than before the recession to say they have enough income, their level of optimism hasn’t shrunk from where it was in 2004, the report notes.
“Their optimism is just as high as it was in a booming economy or a stronger economy” before the recession.
There you go. I bring up optimism to close this post because, dammit, it’s not up to older generations to kill this optimism … or bitch about how “they don’t do it the way we do/did” … rather … it is up to us to fuel this optimism and let this generation find its true voice … and foster the generation to create whatever innovations it is destined to create .. and reach whatever new horizons they are destined to reach … all of which “civilization” will benefit from.
Oh.
We will benefit to (just wanted to remind everyone about that).
