Enlightened Conflict

Tag Archives: social media

answering the help wanted ads for data decipherer

March 12th, 2013

Help Wanted!- Data, data everywhere—and not enough people to decipher it – WSJ headline 3/11data decipherers

 

51% of surveyed IT professionals currently involved in big-data projects cited ‘lack of expertise to connect the dots’ as a reason projects fail in their organization. No other factor was more commonly cited. – infochimps, inc.

 

Well.

This post is either going to show I am incredibly naïve or incredibly smart or incredibly stupid <and clueless>.

Look.

Everyone in business is drowning in data these days.

But here is a newsflash … we were always drowning in data … albeit different data … but I am willing to bet a shitload of money that anyone with any business experience will agree that we had so much data crossing our desks <in the good ole days> that you could build your own great pyramid of paper if you so desired.

As I scratch my head over the flurry of farcical diatribes around “big data” I can’t help but be reminded of the poem “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner”:

 

“water, water everywhere, nary a drop to drink.”

<Bruce translation: despite the depths and vast expanse of the ocean it can’t begin to quench our thirst>

 

We might say the same thing about how technology has enhanced the volume of data these days.

The volume of data is almost unfathomably vast.

And because of that we see thousands of articles on how to sift through the data for business advantages.

Well.

This is crazy talk. Mostly because it seems like everyone is mesmerized by the quantity of data available.

Anyone with any business chops will quickly point out that anyone, throughout the history of business, has always had a quantity of data available.

And we almost always had too much quantity <more than they could ever use>.

The access to quantity has never been an issue.

Now.

data analysis statslogocroppedThey will also point out that part of knowing your business shit is setting up efficient/effective data gathering … so you capture the most important <and not invest gobs of energy on stuff you will never use, cannot use, do not really want to use or is just plain useless> data.

Now.

They will also point that data analysis has three components:

-          Assessing the data available <with gobs available which gobs are most meaningful>

-          Setting up a system to use the useful data <consistently trapping & tracking the useful stuff consistently saves time and effort>

-          Analyzing the data <connecting the dots … instead of just showing numbers>

Now.

They will also point out that the third step in the process is often best done by someone who has no clue how the data is gathered … or even needs to know exactly what data was not gathered <although they may at some point suggest gathering something that someone up the ladder had decided was unimportant> … but they know how to connect dots.

Now.

I will now point out we in business have been doing this for years.

Sure. More and different data may be available today but the schematic looks the same.

 

Business management has always faced an obstacle when it comes to reaping the benefits of big data because they always need someone who can tell them what it all means.

But it seems that because there are so many new ways to gather and track data there is a heightened awareness, and desire, to actually use all this data stuff … with the same good intentions that business had in the past … gain a competitive edge … or at least to keep up with the competition.

Oh.

And here is what any business person with chops will also tell you … relying on data alone isn’t enough. This is a game of both head and gut.data connecting-dots-stevejobs

When you rely too heavily on data, you can become too reactive, too myopic in your thinking and miss out on what the numbers can never tell you … the why’s and the what’s and the <inconceivable to number crunchers> impractical inconsistent sometimes illogical human mind & behavior. Data cannot tell you what to do.

<Big> data can lead to small sharp insights and beget great decisions and action.

But.

Here is a business truth <that most executives do not want to hear these days> … data, of any size <double venti, regular venti, grande, etc.> has no value in and of itself.

The true value of data is found in context.

Look.

You absolutely need a team with technical people to gather & mine the data … but they need to be working together with an experienced analytical person who knows how to ‘connect dots.’ This type of person knows how to observe information, interpret information and place it in context with non-number/data stuff and explain it.

And, no, that person may not be a data gwonk.

They are just good at connecting dots.

And they are good at not being blinded by the newest  & nearest data point.

 

“Gut feel is great for everyday problems. But, it often leads us astray when we’re presented with complex streams of information. We can be blinded by the newest and nearest data point and miss the big picture.” – Nate Silver statistician & author

 

I don’t agree with Nate … well … he did caveat it with “can” and “often” … so maybe I will give him a break.

Gut feel … intuition … ability to “feel” the numbers in context … is essential in order to use the data.

I do believe in what IBM calls “augmenting intuition.” And that means … well … what it says. Augment … ‘in addition to’ … add in as part of your decision criteria.

No amount of numbers <and data of any kind> can eliminate all decision risk. Nor can any amount of numbers <and data of any kind> insure you make the best decision.

Here is my last “Truth” of this post … data & analytics can make you equally smart & stupid.

People make smart decisions using data all the time.

People make stupid decisions using data all the time.

The only thing consistent is people.

And here is where the article kind of truly went a little nutso.

data connectdotsIncreasing training & skill set on ‘connecting dots’ <I assume this is “analyzing the data” in academia> to increase the amount of decipherers available to businesses.

This is where it all falls apart for me.

Because doing what they suggest basically means that data drives good decisions. Data all by itself. No intuition … no feel … no gut from experience … that maybe data can make a decision for you … and they are wrong.

I become scared because I almost feel like this is a deeper dive into that business hellhole I call “responsibility free decision making” with the intent to do the “safest behavior to increase return <or increase advantage>”.

This is using data to make all the decisions <and they even use it to hire a person which is also kind of nuts>.

This is dancing on the head of a pin business management.

And it doesn’t teach people how to think.

It doesn’t utilize skills of existing people <who aren’t steeped in ‘Big Data” but are also not intimidated nor blinded by the newest & nearest data point> who are very good at connecting dots.

And, worse, it guarantees a next business generation of “big Data decipherers” … or people who use data decision making skills and have honed no intuition skills at all.

Am I suggesting “gut management” alone? Of course not. I never have. I never will.

In the 80’s we scoured computer printouts with ‘crosstabs’ and supermarket SAMI and Nielsen reports which contained reams of data point we had to make sense of.

In the 2000’s we are scouring computer printouts <assuming you print out> which contain reams of data points we have to make sense of. And you did it then, as it should be done now, as part of a team to insure you didn’t get dazzled by some shiny data point.

This stuff drives me a little nuts because we all think the newest and nearest data point <oops … innovation> means that the world has turned on its head.

It hasn’t.

Some skills are just … well … good business skills. Adaptable to pretty much any new widget or innovation that mankind can create.

I know how to connect dots. I have no clue how to build systems to gather these dots. And you know what? I am not sure I have ever known.

And I am not unique. There are hundreds if not thousands of Me’s out there.

The skill?
Making Big Data nice small simple learnings/conclusions. Ok. Making any data available into nice small simple learnings.

2013. 1913. 1813.

The skill has always been relevant … and thinking that ‘data decipherer’ is some new skill is crazy.

pew, religion & the muslim world

February 28th, 2013

 

“And the dawn came to the trusted ones and He who had cast them out returned and it was then that the light was shown.” – Muhammad in the Koran.Controversy Continues To Swirl Around Erection Of Mosque Near Ground Zero

 

As part of the newer PewResearch studies they took a look at the Muslim world and Islam religion <note: most of this post is a direct pull from the Pew report>. The survey, which involved more than 38,000 face-to-face interviews in over 80 languages, covered 39 Muslim countries and territories.

 

Let me begin with something that I believe will make you want to read on <because I imagine it does not align with many of the perceptions most people have>.

 

“Most Muslims Want Democracy, Personal Freedoms, and Islam in Political Life” – July 2012 Pew

 

I often believe we in the western world have a skewed perception of Muslims and the religion of Islam therefore there are some things I would like to share from a Pew Research study.

Before I do … consider this.

Fundamentalists are … well … fundamentalists <and often extremists>. Sounds obvious but needs to be stated upfront. I will not call them wackjobs but I will suggest that (1) they are in the minority <in all religious beliefs> and (2) their voices and actions are significantly louder than their sheer numbers and (3) regardless of the religion we may decide to discuss their actions will always be at the fringe of what is acceptable to the mainstream.

I think it is crazy for a Christian based group to base their perceptions on a small fundamentalist <albeit sometimes radical> Muslim group … just as I believe it would be crazy for a Muslim moderate majority to base their perceptions on a small fundamentalist <albeit sometimes radical> Christian group.

Regardless.

Just think and try and keep an open mind … and read some of what a non-biased research study states.

 

The study.

We are many months past what we called the Arab Spring. And the news continues to review the struggles of new government and new social construct. Yet, there continues to be a strong desire for democracy in Arab and other predominantly Muslim nations.

Solid majorities in Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt, Tunisia and Jordan believe democracy is the best form of government, as do a plurality of Pakistanis.

Yes.

Even Pakistan.

A quick side note … we in the united states should never confuse a desire for democracy to be a desire to be friends with the United States. America does not own democracy nor does America have the “how to” guide that other countries can follow <unless you want to skip to chapters called ‘revolution’ and government unrest>.

Anyway.

These countries not only support the general notion of democracy but they also embrace specific features of a democratic system, such as competitive elections and free speech.

However.

They do not want a separation of ‘church & state.’ They would like religion to play a significant role in their country and government.

A substantial number in key Muslim countries want a large role for Islam in political life. But we should note that there are significant differences over the degree to which the legal system should be based on Islam.

This all means that while democratic rights and institutions are popular, they are clearly not the only priorities in the Muslim majority nations surveyed. In particular, the economy is a top concern. And if they had to choose, most Jordanians, Tunisians and Pakistanis would rather have a strong economy than a good democracy. Turks and Lebanese, on the other hand, would prefer democracy. Egyptians are divided.

-          the challenge religious beliefs createpew religion survey all

There is a strong desire for Islam to play a major role in the public life of these nations and most want Islam to have at least some influence on their country’s laws.

Majorities in Pakistan, Jordan and Egypt believe laws should strictly follow the teachings of the Quran, while most Tunisians and a 44%-plurality of Turks want laws to be influenced by the values and principles of Islam, but not strictly follow the Quran.

The world’s 1.6 billion Muslims are united in their belief in God and the Prophet Muhammad and are bound together by such religious practices as fasting during the holy month of Ramadan and almsgiving to assist people in need. But they have widely differing views about many other aspects of their faith, including how important religion is to their lives, who counts as a Muslim and what practices are acceptable in Islam, according to a worldwide survey by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life.

The survey finds that in addition to the widespread conviction that there is only one God and that Muhammad is His Prophet, large percentages of Muslims around the world share other articles of faith, including belief in angels, heaven, hell and fate (or predestination). While there is broad agreement on the core tenets of Islam, however, the Muslims surveyed differ significantly in their levels of religious commitment, openness to multiple interpretations of their faith and acceptance of various sects and movements.

Generational differences are also apparent. Across the Middle East and North Africa, for example, Muslims 35 and older tend to place greater emphasis on religion and to exhibit higher levels of religious commitment than do Muslims between the ages of 18 and 34. In all seven countries surveyed in the region, older Muslims are more likely to report that they attend mosque, read the Quran (also spelled Koran) on a daily basis and pray multiple times each day. Outside of the Middle East and North Africa, the generational differences are not as sharp. And the survey finds that in one country – Russia – the general pattern is reversed and younger Muslims are significantly more observant than their elders.

 

-          a bruce thought.

This is being posted at the same time as my observations on the Religion in America Pew study … and I found it interesting that when you put on some harsh ‘truth goggles’ you begin to see some key generational similarities when discussing religion.

I believe all religions have a challenge with the younger generations.

By the way … this is not a ‘new issue’ in that the world has faced it before. Without going into excruciating detail from the 4th Turning and how religious belief ebbs & flows from generation to generation suffice it to say that the religious challenges today are not solely driven by technology or the ‘flattening of world’ but also by how generations interact with each other.

A couple of thoughts.

First.

We should never be surprised by what we perceive is happening in our little corner of the world is actually happening in many little corners of the world. Call it the 100 Monkey Theory or just call it being human … but it happens.

Second.

Religious leaders, of all religions, shouldn’t be freaking out. And they shouldn’t be wringing their hands worried over the demise of religion. It is simply a demise of the religion as they know it. the construct and core can remain steadfast but out f the general chaos and ‘destruction’ can be built a newer stronger belief system. Out of that being broken something new and stronger can be built.

<call me religious leaders … I would be happy to help>

 

-          both Democracy and Economy Are Priorities

Majorities in five of the six nations polled (and a plurality of Pakistanis) believe democracy is the best form of government. Moreover, there is a strong desire in these nations for specific democratic rights and institutions, such as competitive multi-party elections and freedom of speech.

pew muslim 1

 

Other goals are also clearly important. Many say political stability is a crucial priority, and even more prioritize economic prosperity. When respondents are asked which is more important, a good democracy or a strong economy, Turkey and Lebanon are the only countries where more than half choose democracy. Egyptians are divided, while most Tunisians, Pakistanis and Jordanians prioritize the economy.

Overall, views about the economic situation in these countries are grim, although Turkey is a notable exception.

 

-          a Bruce note

Well. this certainly sounds relevant doesn’t it? money, or prosperity, is important to the happiness of people. Actually balance is important to people. The happiest people tend to be economically sound <not necessarily wealthy> and ‘valuely’ sound <some religious foundation>. They are happiest because they are well grounded in head, heart & wallet. That my friends … is called balance. It always seems crazy to me when all the talking heads expound on one aspect over the other … well … because it is crazy. One aspect can certainly be more important and can dominate within an individual but the happiest has aspects of all. Balance. What a crazy thought. 

 

-          limited support for extremist Groups

Ok. This is an important one.

Across the survey and the key six Muslim nations, less than 20% have a positive opinion about al Qaeda or the Taliban. In Turkey and Lebanon, support for these groups is in the single digits. However, fully 19% of Egyptians rate these extremist organizations favorably.pew muslim 2

 

 Extremist groups are largely rejected in predominantly Muslim nations, although significant numbers do express support for radical groups in several countries. For instance, while there is no country in which a majority holds a favorable opinion of the Palestinian organization Hamas, it receives considerable support in Tunisia, Jordan and Egypt.

The militant Lebanese Shia group Hezbollah receives its highest overall ratings in Tunisia, where nearly half express a positive opinion. Sizable minorities in both Jordan and Egypt also have a favorable view, but Hezbollah’s image has been declining in both countries in recent years.

It is extremely rare that extremists have complete support … and they tend to do have more support within economically challenged groups <because in some odd way they represent ‘hope’ … a powerful attribute>.

 

-          a bruce note

Extremists are … well … extreme. And most people reject the extreme … in anything. However, religious extremists, within any and all religions, are difficult to completely reject because at their foundation, their soul as it were, they have an undying belief in something true. Allah, or God, is not a bad thing to believe in. they struggle to understand that most people believe that the path to salvation is not paved with stones of the extreme. Rather they are paved with some basic beliefs and most of us do not believe we have to, or should have to, walk a gauntlet of pain & suffering in order to be accepted by whatever Higher Being we believe in. We get this. Extremists do not get this. And before ‘we’ start casting stones at the Muslim world we should take a good look around us and at our own brand of extremists hovering around our own world.

It may also be helpful for us to take a look at extremists and terrorism and note that Muslim extremists kill more Muslims <and Christian extremists kill more Christians> as we think about this.

Ok. My point? Religion per se is not the issue. Extremism is the issue.

We should not confuse the issue.

 

That’s it.

It was good information and I wanted to share all under the enlightened thinking heading.

Studies like this are at the foundation of Enlightened Conflict.

Pew, religion and us common folk

February 28th, 2013

pew survey america“There are two bibles … well … only one originally but now split in two. Half is in the book written on paper and the other half is inside of people. You are born with it but it’s up to you to find out. You gotta learn to see it for yourself … that’s the only way.” – from the book ‘City of the Dead’

 

Well.

PewResearch just completed another study measuring religion in America and the number of Americans who do not identify with any religion continues to grow at a rapid pace.

In fact … one-fifth of the U.S. <a third of adults under 30> are religiously unaffiliated today. This is the highest percentages ever seen in Pew Research.

 

-          Before I begin let me share a thought will consistent bring to bear in this post … religion, to me, is not what is written, or said, but what someone believes. It is the ‘half the book’ inside you … whatever that book <Koran, Bible, Torah, etc.> is. That said … the books and teachings provide a construct, or framework, for what someone believes. As I have noted in a past post, I do not believe you can create something from nothing … and religious belief is exactly the same.

 

Anyway.

Pew states that in the last five years alone, the unaffiliated have increased from just over 15% to just under 20% of all U.S. adults. This number includes more than 13 million self-described atheists and agnostics (nearly 6% of the U.S. public), as well as nearly 33 million people who say they have no particular religious affiliation (14%).

religion subtleThis large and growing group of Americans is less religious than the public at large on many conventional measures, including frequency of attendance at religious services and the degree of importance they attach to religion in their lives.

You can view, and download, the entire report here if you would like: http://www.pewforum.org/Unaffiliated/nones-on-the-rise.aspx

 

Let me begin with why I believe this is happening … and conclude with what it doesn’t mean.

 

-          Why these study results are happening.

Intolerance and “the devil is in the details.”

<note: I believe these are significantly more impactful than trust or any – human – flaws organized religion may have exhibited in the past>

It is the extremes in religions that produce intolerance and extreme opinions and threaten a tolerant well balanced society and not the rejection of religion that is creating the results.

I will avoid same sex marriage and abortion and pick a more benign example to showcase absurd intolerance … and how it ripples out in its effect.

For example <and I include the link to this article below> … Mix It Up at Lunch Day in the United States is one of those programs that seems like the right thing to do.

The idea is that on one day of the school year, kids are invited to have lunch with the kind of kids they don’t usually hang out with: the jocks mix with the nerds, lunch tables are racially integrated, et cetera. Sponsored by the Southern Poverty Law Center as part of their Teaching Tolerance division, it arose out of a broad effort to tackle the problems of bullying in the schools and bigotry in society – and it appears to have been effective in breaking down stereotypes and reducing prejudice. Over 2,000 schools nationwide now participate in the program.

 

And, yet, a religious group has challenged the Day in court and threatens this initiative … and initiative that, frankly, you really have to dig deep to find something wrong.

Here is the article:

“I don’t believe for a moment that this hysterical voice that screeches in America’s political sphere is the authentic voice of religion in America. Most religious Americans want to mix it up at lunch! They want to make friends across party lines, and they want to help people who are less fortunate. A survey by the Public Religious Research Institute, released on 24 October, reveals that 60% of Catholics believe the Church should place a greater emphasis on social justice issues and their obligation to the poor, even if that means focusing less on culture war issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage.” – author of linked article, Katherine Stewart

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/oct/26/religious-fundamentalism-toxic-partisanship-us-politics

 

While I am still slightly dumbfounded that someone would be against an initiative like this I use it to make a point that rigidity creates the conflict & tension where organized religion doesn’t win.

The net impression is that organized religion is about … well … organized religion … and not for the overall good of the people.

The struggle that organized religion has is that I would imagine, given an opportunity, it would not want to be affiliated with this smaller group’s actions <or any of the smaller extremist groups out there>.

Organized religion is being damned by a minority <pun intended>.

Regardless … it all feeds into a cynicism for organized religion and increases the belief that all that really matters is ‘individual belief.’

<I will get back to that point at the conclusion>

 

Ok.

The pun I used … “the devil is in the details.”

I apologize to my religious friends if they believe I am suggesting the devil is involved anywhere in this discussion. He is not. The details are the laundry list of “rules of the road” organized religion demands to be a true believer in God.

This is a tricky issue.

I have published articles that state my belief that religions need these details, eliminate some ‘on-the-ground’ ambiguity so that people don’t get stuck in the gray.

However … it is within some of these details that organized religion finds themselves trapped in some relatively absurd boxes.

Look.religion god literally

The percentage of Americans who say the Bible should be taken literally has fallen in Gallup polls from an average of about 38% of the public in the late 1970s and early 1980s to an average of 31% since.

But.

I would like to note that I believe there is a corresponding whiplash affect <going back to my initial “extremes” creating the discomfort with organized religion from an overall perspective>.

What I mean is that as the percentage of ‘literal interpretation of the bible’ people has declined I believe the percentage remaining, who believe ‘literal interpretation’, has become increasingly threatened and therefore have even stronger inclination to literalness.

In other words … that percentage is a minority <and shrinking> but more rigid and uncompromising.

By the way … that is a natural human response.

Regardless.

 

-          What this study does not mean.

God is loved no less than before.

And moral underpinnings are not diminished.

 

You cannot equate the fact that one in five Americans having no religious affiliation with a diminished importance of the moral underpinnings. Suggesting such a thing is extremely unfair, and untrue, to those who may display a distaste for organized religion but who do not doubt the existence of a God.

In addition, even if you take into consideration a rejection of aspects of the “literal interpretation of the written word” <recorded thousands of years ago> doesn’t diminish the moral standards that exist in our minds.

One can still have the same ethics and morals as proclaimed by any of the religions without belonging to a church/mosque/temple.

 

Me?

religions togetherIn general I believe Americans have lost faith in religion … not in God.

<note: I do not believe Americans are alone in this … I just do not have the research on hand to pony up and show it beyond my opinion>

 

My issue/thoughts?

I do believe religion, or organized faith, not only has a role in society but I also believe it has an opportunity.

I said at one point earlier … “feeds into a cynicism for organized religion and increases the belief that all that really matters is ‘individual belief’ …”

I do believe construct matters. Guardrails matter. And sometimes individuals are not good at building guardrails … and I know for sure if I were to gather 100 people and have each build guardrails they would not all be the same.

In addition, humankind, in general, seems to be showing more and more flaws.

In addition, it seems we humans, in general, are becoming less and less centrist <in everything> and more extreme in our overall opinions.

This means more divisive.

In addition, leader/heroes are becoming more difficult to find.

 

What this means to me?

We need God.

We need a belief in a God.

And whether we like, or dislike, organized religion the role it plays is to organize people around God. They facilitate (and shouldn’t act like the end all).

I imagine I am suggesting that people are disillusioned with institutions in general.

But I don’t believe we are actually disillusioned with God.

And <God forbid> if we are?

I tend to believe it shows a lack of understanding.

And religious organizations can help people understand.

 

Couple of thoughts to end this research overview.

First.

The organized opportunity.

We are better drivers when there are lines on the road. We know what lanes to stay in and even use blinkers <most of the time> when we want to shift lanes.

Rules of the road are good.

It permits us to not only judge our own actions but the actions of others.

Is this a bad analogy? Maybe. But you get the point.

I do not agree with people who say “we know the right thing to do without anyone telling us.” We all can always use someone telling us the right thing to do. I call it stimulus-response. Maybe that is organized religion’s sole responsibility to society and culture … to provide a “right” stimulus and we can ‘respond’ as we see fit <accept, adapt, reject>.

I don’t actually believe that but if that is true I can think of worse things.

I actually believe that if organized religion <of all religions> get their shit together they will be in the stimulus-response business. In other words … stimulate ‘good’ responses.

That is called ‘encouraging desired behavior’ in the business world.

Crazy talk on my part? Maybe. But it can be done … and it works.

 

Second.

Faith & hope.

I do not have proof of this but I have studied human behavior for years.

I get concerned that as organized religion decreases individualism <or “it is all about me” attitude> increases. In other words we lose sight of the bigger picture ‘hope’ and larger view of ‘faith in groups, culture, civilization, etc.”

I am not suggesting organized religion is necessary to keep us out of some self-satisfying individual driven society but I do believe it plays a significant role.

It helps balance.

It helps provide those societal guard rails.

Does this show that I don’t have faith in people to do the right thing all by their lonesome?

Whew.

Maybe.

Individuals respond to the culture they exist in. If they perceive that those at the top are ‘in it for themselves’ and driven by self/individual wants/needs/desires than they will start to emulate that behavior <at least some aspects>.

It becomes a “Me” driven society.religion world 940

Organized religion, for all its warts, is a constant reminder that salvation is not just through God but also society. You may not follow all their rules and regulations but you do keep a North Star view on the betterment of all versus I.

Religion is in the faith & hope business.

And, frankly, we all could use a good dose of that on occasion.

 

Sorry.

I wrote less about the Pew Research than I did my own thoughts. But I did include a link to the research and it is interesting stuff.

In the end I believe people tend to look at this research and wring their hands in dismay and start thinking about the “crumbling of civilization as we know it” rather than recognize it is simply reflecting change.

And change represents opportunity.

And I think we could all take an opportunity to do some soul searching <pun intended>.

urging Catholics to come home

January 16th, 2013

Catholic C hurchInteriorCapeMayNJ

“… get back in the game.” – Lou Holtz for Catholic Come Home campaign

 

Oh my.

I was getting my fill of football action on TV and … ‘holy mackerel!’ … a mush mouthed Lou Holtz starts telling me I should go back to church <or better said … in his words … ‘get back in the game’>.

 

Catholic Come Home Lou Holtz: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcMGJmB5D84

 

The campaign is called “Catholic come Home” and in my world <consumer attitudes & behavior> this is a ‘lapsed customer’ strategy as in ‘I used to attend church but now I am a lazy ass and play tennis instead.’

Oh.

And they have tried it before:

Catholic Come Home 2011: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvA29P1U7OU

Anyway.

I am not going to take the Catholics to task for doing this because … in fact … in 2009 I actually wrote something that suggested they needed to do something like this <in combination with some internal organizational actions>.

<http://brucemctague.com/why-islam-appears-to-be-kicking-christianitys-ass>

 

However.

I am going to suggest they can do a shitload better than this.

And I will even define ‘better’ because the execution is horrendously trite and how the message is communicated <the words themselves> will only appeal to those who are already parking their happy asses on the pew.

 

But where I begin is with my main gripe.

Why is it that something as important as this doesn’t get some good expert advice and work?

 

With that gripe I will begin by skewering the attempt.

This Lou Holtz fake locker room pep talk is the newest “evangomercial” <I did not make up that term> from Catholics Come Home.

It intended to “inspire, educate and evangelize inactive Catholics and others, and invite them to live a deeper faith in Jesus Christ.”

Now.

I love that message. I love the direction. I love they actually incorporated a strong call to action <stronger than simply ‘inviting’>.

I love that someone actually decided to try this.

But. How the message is communicated? This fake locker room pep talk?

One word.

Yikes.

Lou  says:

catholics tv ad“for victory in life we’ve got to keep focused on the goal, and the goal is heaven.”

And.

“And when we fumble due to sin — and it’s gonna happen — confession puts us back on the field.”

And.

“So if you haven’t been going to mass weekly, get back in the game … we’re saving your seat on the starting bench this Sunday.”

 

Holy cow.

You cannot make this stuff up. This is the kind of garbage I would see an unskilled aspiring advertising young person put in their journal as a first draft. And then scratch out as a first draft garbage attempt. Or this is some person who is sitting at home saying “hey, I can do that advertising stuff as well as any of those guys getting paid the big bucks!” <as they scratch their millionth lottery scratch card thinking ‘why shouldn’t I be a millionaire too?’>.

C’mon.

That script. Who the hell talks like that? <very few … maybe an evangelist … maybe a church attending believer … uh oh … but none of the ‘lapsed customers’>

Next.

The execution.

Who the hell would actually think this was a good use of Lou Holtz?

I would never use Lou as a spokesperson anyway <because he slurs instead of states> but say I actually did have the opportunity to use such a famous <and semi respected> spokesperson. Well. I certainly would seek to maximize his speaking skills <which would minimize long dialogue> and I would certainly seek to maximize respect & trust quotient <translation … I wouldn’t put him in a fake scenario and ask him to do a fake speech>.

For god’s sake <pun intended> … let the man speak from his heart. He used to be a coach but is no longer one. And everyone <who matters> knows that. But … he is, and has always been, a catholic & Christian. I don’t need any borrowed interest here. In fact borrowed interest makes it trite & almost silly.

<note: this topic is not silly>

Ok.

What happened? <and I don’t even have to guess this time>

 

Note: Here is where I go directly to hell <without passing Go>.

 

Catholics Come Home President Tom Peterson  said … “The Holy Spirit inspired me to write this script more than a year ago … by God’s grace I ran into coach Holtz last July in the Los Angeles Airport, inviting him to star in this evangomercial. So you can understand why I’m confident that God is watching over us and has a wonderful plan in store!”

Well.

God is omnipotent and omniscient … therefore … he is aware of all the good and bad advertising out there <I believe He can watch all 285 channels on TV at exactly the same time> … and I do not believe this advertising was the plan He had in store for the Catholics.

Please.

Tell me that God isn’t an advertising hack.

Look.

I absolutely believe this is something the Catholic Church <or Christianity in general> should be doing. It’s important for the church to think like a consumer business in order to evangelize <gain/regain customers> and defend itself <retain customers>.

I agree with what the organization says on their own website … “So many ask: Where are the Catholics? With so many fallen-away Catholics, why don’t we use the mass media to help our fellow Catholics return to Jesus and his church?” <and I could quote numerous numbers from recent PewResearch to support the depth of the challenge but this post is long enough>

Here is what I said in a ‘wayback post’.

Currently Christianity is mush and its extremists are uncoordinated and verbally inept in the PR department. Islamic moderates are silent and Islam extremists are vocal (coordinated as a group, clear in its communications and beliefs – regardless of how wacky they may be — and they have the PR game down).

Success will be dictated by coordination & focus … and tell it to us straight.

If I could sit Tom down … or any Christian leader for that matter … I would suggest that they remember the strategic decision they made.

First and foremost they said “return.”

This is a lapsed customer. Most likely this customer is not extremely dissatisfied <as in they hate the product> … they still love the product <God in this case> … they just have doubts <about the manufacturer>.

My guess is that despite the fact many church going Catholics are embarrassed by this commercial … most of those same people hang on every word and say “amen” <that is ‘right on’ in non-Catholic street language>  to the words themselves.

And you know what? If they were the target maybe this would be an okay commercial.

But they ain’t the target … and I bet I get 100 emails from some grumpy Catholics and I promise you I will send a short message saying exactly that.

Good words for a current church going customer.

Bad words for a lapsed <one we would like to ‘come home’> customer.

What would be good words?

Remind people how they feel when they ‘come home.’

Don’t tell them they will go to hell if they don’t go home <because … I hate to tell Tom and everyone else who worked on this ad … but by telling everyone that the path to heaven is the Catholic home then the obvious conclusion is that I am going to hell if I don’t go home>.

Tell them about Hope.

Tell them about comfort.

Tell them about grace <in life>.

 

I have said this before, will say it again … and will say it all to any Christian willing to listen:

 

Three thoughts in taking steps to getting Christianity <and Catholicism as a subset> back on track:

 

1. Get Organized. Remember. It is called organized religion not organization religion. Get organized but don’t let organizations get in the way.

  • Organized idea 1: Get the different Christian perspectives together and gain alignment. Be organized and focused on the core aspects. This includes picking the objectives, the people target tied to each objective and the message and stay focused and go do it.
  • Organized idea 2: Ralph Nader just published an interesting book “Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us!”highlighting a thought that the way to create change was to have the most successful business leaders gather together and lead the change America needs. Why can’t Christian/Catholic non-church tied business leaders do the same?

 

2. Create construct. Cut contradictions. Focus on the core aspects and create a construct for people to simplify, focus and understand. I understand religion has “dimensions” but on core aspects there should be no contradictions within Christian belief. If there are “rules of the road” then set them up. Be clear. For example, “You can do this but you cannot do this.” You know what I mean. If the “organized group” cannot agree on this construct then how the heck do you think the general public will be able to agree with anything?

Now.hope holding hands2

This doesn’t mean this should all be communicated in advertising & commercials. Because this type of information is what is called ‘features.’ People don’t buy features … people buy benefits. Yes. Going to heaven is a benefit … but even better … so is Hope. So is Grace.

Regardless. Home is our personal cocoon from Life. It is where we re energize to go out and battle day after day outside those four walls. I am not a Christian but I gotta tell ya … I could think of worse homes than a church for people to re energize within.

And I cannot think of a better aspect to simplify & focus on than that.

 

3. Organizational Discipline. Christian leaders (upper, middle and lower management) all need to follow the rules. Those they lead maybe make “human” mistakes and earn forgiveness but leaders are role models and cannot be permitted to make ‘core aspect’ mistakes and be forgiven. The leadership team is judged on how disciplined it is in following the master design/construct.

And while I initially wrote this for actual human behavior … this is also relevant to the ‘business side’ of Christianity <or let’s assume you think like a business without treating it like a business>.

All that said … if Catholics decide to actually do advertising they have clearly made a business decision. Marketing & advertising is a business.

Suffice it to say … in Life & in Business … there will always be things you want to do but then there are the things you SHOULD do. Tom <and Catholics come Home> wanted to say the words they used in the commercial … and they were right/true words … but they SHOULD have done something different and said different words to get the group  they were targeting to listen.

 

That’s it.

That is what was on my mind. You can certainly debate individual points. But don’t let that stop you from thinking about the overall perspective because something needs to be done. “Staying the course” is not an option. And maybe what I wrote can be a spark for someone else defining “what is right” if this isn’t.

I am not Cathloic nor am I a Christian <although a good friend has suggested to me that “there is a good Christian lurking within you Bruce” one day after a good philosophical/theological discussion>. Regardless of what I am personally … there is good advertising & communicating and there is bad advertising & communicating.

This catholic come home effort is bad.

And that is too bad … because I cannot think of many things more important than communicating this message effectively.

 

Ok.

Lastly. A quick explanation about me <because I do not really want to go to Hell>.

Maybe this may help me out by having everyone understand Bruce McTague is probably considered a non-believer by Christians and Muslims. But he does believe in God. He would lean toward the Christian version of God but mostly believes that people should have the right to choose and make an educated choice with regard to religion and their path to God. He is in general a supporter of organized religion and its directed thinking of God. Despite not having a specific religion nor attends church he finds that in times of desperation and depression it is comforting to think that God maybe looking over his particular little corner of the world. And maybe he feels passionate about this topic because in the end he believes that God represents Hope. And everyone everywhere deserves to have hope.

 

—

Last note: this effort is something I would assist on in a second … for free. Call me and I will make it happen.

 

who gets fired?

September 24th, 2012

…”we helped leave this race a statistical dead heat.”- stated after spending $250 million dollars

The Wall Street Journal outlines that an unprecedented amount of money is being spent in the American election. The total is somewhere near $500 million to date in advertising (here is tracking to date: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/track-presidential-campaign-ads-2012/).

Oh my. Think what that money could be used for … okay … that is a different article.

The spending, and number of ads, has become a little wacky this year because it isn’t just the candidates money nor is the majority of spending being done by the actual candidates <now there are random political ‘super pacs’ … people who say what they want to say and spend what they want to spend>.

Regardless.

Apparently all the spending hasn’t done jackshit to influence voter opinion.

Here is a humdinger of a Republican quote “we believe we have kept a number of races competitive and put important issues on the table.”

That is code for “our money didn’t do jackshit.”

Another quote <republican> …”we helped leave this race a statistical dead heat.” Please note that this was said despite the fact Romney’s poll numbers continue to lag the incumbent.

Wall Street Journal also did a spectacular job highlighting the spectacular ineptness of the advertising in specific areas where republicans overinvested in order to create the desired behavior <vote Republican> and reported spectacular failure to do so <in some of these states/areas Romney’s scores have actually declined>.

So.

Here is my question.

Who is getting fired?

Why do I ask that? Well, let’s try this whole situation out in the business world.

P&G spends over $4billion (in the US I believe). Pepsi spends an estimated $2.1 billion a year on marketing, McDonald’s $1.2 billion, and Coca-Cola is not far behind at $895 million. Let’s get closer to apples to apples comparisons … State Farm spends $860million, Apple around $650million and Volkswagen $730million.

I am either the CMO or the advertising agency standing up at the end of the year giving my report (just to be clear … any sane CMO would be putting their advertising person up at the front of the room to tell this story).

-          “Gee. The <plug in any of the billion or million dollar number from above here> kept us competitive. We didn’t gain any sales but, gosh darn it, statistically it was a dead heat! In addition … I would note we were absolutely disappointed with the lack of results in the places where we made investment spending <translation: we overspent and under delivered>.”

Needless to say … I am fired.

Heck.

I would fire me.

Why? Because some smartass <like me> is sitting off to the side saying something like “how the fuck do you spend $250 million dollars and get no return or increase?”

But you don’t even need a smartass like me sitting around in the business world because in the general business world $250 million is a lot of money and people expect to see some <positive> results if you spend that amount.

However, let’s assume that didn’t get me fired.

I actually make it to Q&A. I guarantee you someone <most likely the CFO because that is the person who seems to ask this question the most> will ask “what did we actually do and do we have any thoughts on whether it was the right thing to do?”

Here is where I figure out how to shift from my 110 page powerpoint presentation, where I had manipulated numbers to mask the disappointing results, to video so I can show the television executions. Yup. Of which almost 80% are negative messaging.

Needless to say … I am now fired.

And, once again, I would fire me.

Let me begin here by saying that with this large a budget I could live with running some <maybe 15-20%?> negative ads because they speak directly, and only, to my core audience who wants to think bad things about the other choices. Inevitably the negativity solidifies my base because I am simply saying what they want to hear <even if it may not be completely true>.

All that said … if the majority, the significant majority. Of my messaging is negative … well … ‘Houston, we have a problem.’

In general business negative advertising is specious at best in a short term effort and never an option long term.

In politics negative advertising is (1) unbelievable to the general audience, (2) polarizing in an unhealthy way and (3) well … as the British would say … ‘it’s just not cricket’ … <the equivalent of “not according to Hoyle”> ,in other words, it is diminishing through negativity rather than expanding through positive. Negativity increases your value by diminishing the other (so you could simply become the tallest midget). Negativity has never been an effective communications tactic and it has never been proven to build long term brand value.

I would tell politics the same thing any business industry knows … in a negative war of words no one wins. The entire category loses.

I would stand up in front of any politician right now and unequivocally state that the advertising war currently going on is not only a losing strategy for the candidates but a losing tactic for the country’s psyche.

Regardless, this isn’t a business lesson; this is me wondering who is going to get fired for wasting $500 million dollars.

I find the entire topic if not insane certainly inane.

Well.

The only people who I can envision taking solace in this entire insane topic are the Belarusians.

Huh? Belarus? Yup.

Belarus just had a round of elections in which the opposition candidates were ignored by television and newspapers declined to publish information.

Someone should send the opposition party the Wall Street journal article and suggest they just saved a shitload of money because any advertising they did was not going to make any difference anyway.

the futurist

July 11th, 2012

This is going to discuss a book called The Futurist <by a guy named Ottmer>. But before I discuss the book … this overall topic is one of my favorites … ahhhhhhhhhhhh … let me clarify … one of my favorite cynical topics … the fact that there are these bullshit slinging presenters and trend watchers wannabes who make an amazing living off of sound bite thoughts.

Do I begrudge them the ability to find a sound bite? Nope.

What I do have a grudge against is that I, and many other people, then have to invest an inordinate amount of energy explaining to people that the sound bite is just that … a sound bite … a simplistic meaningless irrelevant concept in the real world.

And then I found a book with someone who apparently has the same cynical attitude with regard to these ‘trend spotters.’

<note: I wish I had written this book>

So.

I have a stack of books next to my bed which invariably has some books that have been waiting a while to be read. I just finished The Futurist. In case you don’t want to read this well written quasi-fun, quasi-cynical fictional look at the “buzz creator” future trends world, here is nutshell look at these pop-culture bullshit artists using the opening speech at the Futureworld conference (a fictional conference) by JP Yates (a fictional person/futurist) in the book:

I realized this morning over breakfast that I’ve spent a good portion of my life seeking the approval of people I can’t stand.  Including myself.

The truth is, I know nothing. Understand nothing.

I try. I am not lazy. But the more I try to understand something the more intertwined and complex it seems. The more I realize I am out of the proverbial loop. The literal loop. The existential loop. The more I think of things the more I question whether anyone is properly looped. In fact, I challenge the very existence of the loop, proverbial, literal or metaphorical. So this is a fundamental problem, being out of a loop that I don’t even believe in.

Most books or movies or creation myths have a hero who knows all there is to know about at least one thing. And he uses that gift to overcome an obvious and blatant evil adversary. He has insider knowledge. Special gifts. Ingenious ways of getting to the core of things. The answer. The solution. The truth. He knows what’s right and wrong. He knows what’s next. And he knows what to do about it.

I don’t.

I don’t understand the present let alone the fucking future.

Yet we claim to understand. Pretend to. Some actually believe it, that they do know. You know the people. The ones who talk about such things with such cocksure passion that you think, shit, maybe they do know, maybe they really do. They speak in absolutes. Blacks and whites. They speak with soothing partisan simplicity. They speak with their hands and use Powerpoint like a sword. They quote people you ought to know more about. They work on a privileged higher plane and posit their views with a condescending subterranean confidence, convincing you not to worry, that forces are at work on other levels, levels that simple folks like us cannot even begin to fathom, so it’s best not to worry your pretty little head about it and trust them, the experts, that this is the way it is. And the way it will be.

People get rich and powerful operating this way, perpetuating the myth of the uber level, the exclusive loop. Dispensing their wisdom and opinions and edicts to the masses.  Breaking down the conflicting moral, political and economic issues of 52 billion people into a binary proposition. Yes or no. War or peace. Good or bad. With us or against us. Ginger or Mary Ann.

Presidents work on this level. And dictators. Talk show hosts. Professional wrestlers. Actresses on the steps of the capitol. Conservatives. Liberals. The members of VFW Post #442. CEOs. Madison Avenue. Wall street.  Sesame Street.

They’re all in the loop. All working on another level.

I’m not.

I don’t believe in the scared loop or the secret level.

In fact, I think the more people claim to absolutely know, the more clueless and insecure thery absolutely are.  Of course, I can’t be sure of this.

Which brings me to us. And to me. Who do we think we are?  Who did I think I was?

How can I call myself a futurist when I missed the most cataclysmic event of our time? How can I predict tomorrow when the world is on fire today?

How did I see reality TV coming but miss this?

And let’s be honest: we all did.

We make all these pronouncements but none of us ever goes back to check on their accuracy. Shit, if the people in this room were right just 1percent of the time, we’d all be telecommuting from Tahiti, eating dinner in a pill form, and having literal sex with our virtual selves. But if you talk shit long enough, sooner or later you may actually be right, and if by some fluke that is the case, watch out, because any successful prediction is always followed by the cannibalistic scramble for credit – the blood grab to brand an original thought as your own.

We all want to be the first to be there to identify a “click moment”, but we live in a world that may never click again.

We’re great at telling people the future they need to buy into instead of the present they should be making the most of.

And what’s hilarious is that we all believe it. That we are geniuses. That we are all responsible for and deserving of our wealth. More deserving of the privileged life than, say, a teacher or a mason. A cleric or a hot dog vendor. Despite the fact that 99% of us did not create our good fortune. The markets did. Or luck. Or heredity.

I believed it.

But not anymore.

You see, we may be able to identify cool, but we can never invent it. Cool is never manufactured. You never try to be cool. It happens.

Same goes for goodness. And truth.

And the only truth I know …is that I know nothing. And even though you may dress the part – the missoni scarves, the yellow jumpsuits, the tiny glasses, the all-whites, the all-blacks, the Nehru’s, the sandals, the glittering gadgets – none of you know anything either. Sorry about that.

We are not innovators.  We are fucking abominations.

To paraphrase someone smarter than me, who still knows nothing, the philosophical task of our age is for each of us to decide what it means to be a successful human being.

I don’t know the answer to that, but I would like to find out.

In the meantime, I know absolutely zilch.

I am the founding father of the Coalition of Clueless.

Ok.

“We are not innovators, we are fucking abominations.” <note to everyone: awesome>

Cynical? Sure.

Have I felt this listening, or reading, to some of the popular trend spotter ‘gurus’? You betcha.

Do I wish I had written this? Absofuckinglutely.

Ok. The book.

It is the kind of book that may remind you of Joseph Heller (Good as Gold and maybe a business version of Catch-22).

By the way … a ‘futurist’ is one of those nifty bullshit words business nowadays uses for those pop psychologists who identify trends and recognizers of ‘future cool.’

And I also loved the book because it permitted me a glimpse into why I could have never been a successful ‘futurist’ … well … beyond the fact I suck at identifying meaningful trends of course … and that is futurists need to be blindingly optimistic with regard to prosperity … and I would be screwed because I am too pragmatic.

That said. If you are a cynical pragmatist like me and you care about this topic you will love this book.

Each chapter has a paragraph summary of former achievements of the protagonist/Futurist.

“He once spoke before the graduates of a Bible college in Virginia about the future of God and one week later delivered the keynote address to the Adult Video Distributors Conference in Vegas about the future of porn, and received standing ovations at both.”

<awesome … and real life practical truth>

Another. The Futurist as described by one analysis in the book:

“He used to believe that things were getting better. He thought that science had a heart and that progress had a conscience. Then came doubts, followed by questions and alarming insights. Soon this high-profile, big-ticket trend prognosticator was prophesying doom and gloom.

He began to criticize the present, and he warned of a more damaged tomorrow if we refused to change. He gave heads-ups and watch-outs, supported by facts and scientifically validated forecasts and cautionary tales. But this kind of outlook left his audiences feeling troubled, which was not the desired effect. It was suggested that he might want to put a bit more of a smile back on his work. So he switched gears and began telling those audiences what they wanted to hear.”

That is a truth.

I guarantee it. Seth Godin. Faith Popcorn. Tipping Point guy.  First of all they are not sharing unique ideas … they are simply <mostly … just to give some ideas the benefit of the doubt> taking other people’s ideas … or thoughts … or portions/fragments of thoughts … and re-presenting them not only with gusto but also in a slightly different sound bite <sic: bullshit> way to capture the interest of whomever they are writing to and for.

a stern light

July 11th, 2012

This is a follow up thought to the Futurist. A follow up maybe because this has to do with the present … and learning from the past.

“if men could learn from history what lessons it might teach us! But passion and party blind our eyes, and the light which experience gives is a lantern on the stern, which only shines on the waves behind us!” – Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1831)

So often in our desire to ‘figure out’ today we stand upon steps built upon hopes of tomorrow. Our lessons from history to often shine upon the waves behind us instead of maybe lighting our way. It is unfortunate. Because while I not only believe we can learn from the past I also believe that much of what happens is a derivative of past actions <if you look hard enough>.

Well. That is certainly a valid thought but there is  more important thought with regard to the present.

And I think Max Dublin says this thought the best:

“It is myopic and evasive to forget that most questions that can be posed about the future can be more meaningfully and forcefully be posed about the present.  If we only used the knowledge we now have, and used it only for the good, we could have heaven on earth, without one further innovation or discovery, and thereby create a better world than any of our false prophets are capable of envisioning. It is not a matter of ingenuity but of character, and it is the key to any and all possible futures. ” – Max Dublin

Max is correct.

Oftentimes we are so unhappy, or possibly so fearful, of what is … we invest a shitload of energy seeking and sinking ourselves into what could be <notice I didn’t say ‘what will be’>.  It is natural. If today doesn’t look that good inevitably we cast a hopeful eye to the horizon. Heck. I know I do.

But.

What if.

What if we used all the energy and knowledge we currently have to try and solve what would be good for today … whew … I bet we could create a pretty kick ass world for everyone. Today … and, well, tomorrow.

Yeah .. yeah .. yeah. Maybe we wouldn’t have the 15th version of the i-phone or a new even lighter creamier but less caloric mint double chocolate chip ice cream but maybe we would have less poverty or less obesity or less of something bad that needs to be solved.

I sometimes believe in our capitalistic fear of being left behind we ignore what is.

I imagine it is a real fear that one stops thinking about the future and others invest in the future and they get it wrong and get passed by … and I imagine all businesses have this fear.

But.

Here is a truth.

We do not need a 15th version of the i-phone.

We do not need a new improved lower caloric ice cream.

We do not need a lot of the new innovations that are constantly thrown upon us.

Ok. Do we ‘want’ … or maybe ‘like’ the new innovations? Sure. We are human.

But do we ‘need’?

C’mon. Be serious. Of course not.

A Max truth <which I agree with>.

It is not a matter of ingenuity … it is a matter of character. And, as usual, character is the key to all possible futures <not making money>.

Yeah. I know. This is a pipe dream in the world of business.  A world where “creating a sustainable world” is simply a bolt on to “how much money can I make” in the corporate world.

But <this is a huge but>.

What if some company invested all their innovation money in not coming up with a new widget but rather  coming up with a better way to use what we have?

I know.

Heresy.

Maybe myopic and evasive <as Max says>.

Oh. Maybe it is just not what Futurists want to hear.

Oh well.

It is a great quote. A smart quote. And, more importantly, a great thought. It’s the kind of thought someone in a position that matters should be thinking.

unfortunate timing affects credibility

June 16th, 2012

So.

Using a paid spokesperson is tricky. You can not be stupid about it <that is a big deal … because companies get stupid when they pull out their wallets to pay for some spokespeople> … you can even find someone who fits well … and even find someone who will not embarrass you <the company, the brand, the product> and then … well … some unfortunate timing occurs.

An example.

Toyota just featured Grace Potter for one of their smaller more economical models. She is from Vermont. She seems practical and down to earth and when you saw her with the Toyota it really wasn’t a stretch to believe it. And I thought it was a good choice.

And Toyota, being a savvy marketer, placed the television advertisement in the new VH1 Storytellers featuring Grace Potter and the Nocturnals. That was a good choice. Ok. Actually awesome use of compatible editorial environment.

Oh. Oops. Here is the unfortunate timing … during the storyteller portion of the show Grace had just finished a delightful story about how she took off in her car for 4 or 5 days driving back roads trying to unlock writer’s block. Unfortunately she said “I took my car … a Fiat … and just drove.”

Is it a big deal? Heck. I am probably one of a dozen people who noticed it <consciously at least>. There are probably a few more who subconsciously knew something was wrong and it just felt like a disconnect for some reason. But. Here is the deal. If you are gonna pay the bucks to have a paid spokesperson you gotta have some of the details under control … or … well … its just not worth paying the bucks.

Was it unfortunate? Yup. Was it avoidable? Yup. Was it bad for credibility? Yup.

smile America but do it britishly (over a bbq)

June 8th, 2012

Ok.

This could either be considered nitpicky (otherwise called … “irrelevant dancing on the head of a pin”) or craftsmanship.

So.

Marketing can be effective any number of ways. So this isn’t about effectiveness. But it is about attention to detail. And in that detail I get to discuss craftsmanship.

The other day I saw a wonderful Burger King ‘smile America its BBQ time’ television commercial that I am not really sure sold anything in particular <which is okay because I know who burger king is and I don’t need to be bludgeoned with another promotion> but it was …well … American <it opens with a screen sized American flag for gods sake>.

It surprised me a little coming from burger king but that was okay because it made me feel good.

And made me think about Burger King in a slightly different way (a good way).

Ah.

But me being me.

The ad had a really nice Dire Straits song playing as a bunch of beautifully shot patriotic & bbq visuals and supers showed up onscreen.

Here is my issue.

Dire Straits is a British band. Silly? Yeah. Possibly. But this is my post and this is about craftsmanship.

Here is the commercial:

Smile America BK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoB_zm_UDb8

Anyway.

In thinking about my issue with this advertisement I put this in the same category as when we were talking new business in our company and someone asked me about the new Belks department store marketing <being a south regional department store they finally decided to leverage their southern roots>.

I said the new positioning (southern focused) was smart.

I said the execution was okay (seemed slightly off from positioning and kind of unspectacular visually).

I said the music was a spectacular mistake. It was a great song from KT Tunstal … who is from Scotland. Now. She may be from south scotland but I am fairly sure Belk’s wasn’t talking about that south.

<note: Oh. Someone must have heard me … because now the music is ‘She Sets Me Free’ by Tim Halperin … from Omaha … at least in america …>

Regardless.

Nitpicky?  Sure.

Make a difference to 99.9% of consumers? Nope. It won’t.

Make a difference within the organization? Maybe. Consistency with regard to a positioning is important. And you need to be ruthless in pursuit of it.

Craftsmanship? Yeah. It makes a difference. Great marketing is about the details.

And it just isn’t that difficult to insure you use an American band piece of music if you are going to take an American tone in your marketing communications.

Just as if you are going to suggest to people <with a new ‘brand campaign’ no less> that you are embracing your ‘southernness’ than, please, for gods sake, use an artist from America if not even from somewhere in the south.

In the end this kind of stuff doesn’t matter much to people.

But.

I have to tell you. if you don’t take it seriously than people who matter to you won’t take it seriously.

You can still create fun, entertaining, musically driven marketing and still ‘stay on mission.’

I am sure someone will agree this is nitpicky.

I may suggest that in this fragmented communications world you have to be nitpicky. Small things like this can have big repercussions down the road.

Enlightened Conflict