You’re Thinking Like A Marketer, Not A Customer

If you’re running a site to promote something (a product, an event, a way-of-life), and you’re doing so not simply out of the goodness of your heart,* but for financial gain, chances are you’re doing it totally wrong.

And if you are doing it wrong (and you probably are, trust me), then you’re losing money, losing audience, and losing sight of what makes your product/event/philosophy remarkable.

Nine times out of ten, the big problem is that you’re thinking from the point of view of a Marketer rather than as a customer. It’s nothing new to say this, of course, but I wonder if you could recognize it when you see it.

This is one of the biggest signs, and it turns people away before they’ve even had time to figure out where they are:

A homepage that screams “Buy This Now!,” instead of posing a polite, quiet, “How can I help you find what you’re looking for?” or even, “Hi! How are you today? Please feel free to take a look around and let me know if you have any questions.”

There’s a reason that brick-and-mortar salespeople** and cashiers and waitstaff and receptionists and pretty much everyone else use polite language like that above. They are there to serve you and assist you in paying for what you want to buy, not shove the Bison Burger Special down your throat.

Consider this bit of analogy:

It is raining. Hard. You don’t have an umbrella, but need to walk another twenty blocks down Fifth Avenue to get to your job interview. Crossing 36th Street, you glimpse a rack of umbrellas inside a store you’ve never shopped in before, a place called Jerry’s Stuff On Fifth. Sweet. Salvation. You open the door. *Ringaling!* You step inside, casually scanning the room from side to side to locate the rack of umbrellas you had noticed through the window, as you shake off a little of the rainwater and try to calm your breath. Without warning, you are ambushed by sales associates on either side, yelling and arm-waving and shoving Plastic Thermoses in front of your face.

“$9.95! Two for $15!!! Tell A Friend!!! Buy Now! Buy Now! $9.95! Two for $15! Only today! Special Special!”

You try to speak: “But...but...I just want an um—”

“Thermos Special! Buy Today! $9.95! Two for $15!”

If you don’t go running back out into the thunderstorm after enduring that, then I’ll eat my shorts. (Oh wait, I already did that.)

Make sense yet?

Here’s a translation of my little allegory:

Rain = Google

Umbrella = Search Query

Jerry’s Stuff On Fifth = Your Website

Plastic Thermoses Salespeople Of Doom = Bullshit Links and Flashing Banners and Fancy Rollovers and Embedded Commercials and BUY NOW MOTHERFUCKER Buttons that have absolutely, positively, NOTHING to do with what your customers want because you haven’t even bothered to ask them.

Any questions?

----
*Of course, even people doing stuff out of the goodness of their hearts routinely make the same mistakes. But the stakes are frequently higher when money gets involved, and for some reason, folks working for-profit tend to approach things with a much higher dose of ego, self-deception, and propensity for outright lying and other unethical behaviors that basically define “Marketers.” (Sub-note: marketers are not intrinsically evil. Marketers (capital M) are.) Go Back Up

**I am aware that a lot of salespeople are assholes. These are not the ones I am referring to. Have you stopped to think that your site acts like the very worst of the worst Timeshare salespeople? Go Back Up

MacBook Air Brand Naming

One of my biggest criticisms about the MacBook Air brand naming (as a hypothetical based on rumors - not as a name in and of itself) hinged on the fact that it is bad form to include the word “air” as a non-proper-noun in the slogan, “There’s something in the air.” Apple did this on the banners that adorned Moscone Center, as can be seen here at AppleInsider.

But, somehow proving my point, during Steve Jobs’ keynote (which I just finished watching this morning in podcast form), the slide containing this very quote showed the word “Air” properly capitalized, which is much more appropriate (though still just as nonsensical, if you ask me) from a branding standpoint.

So why would it change? Perhaps a slip up in the initial banner printing that was fixed for the digital keynote. Perhaps the banners were prepared months earlier, before the MacBook Air name had been decided upon, but the concept of wireless and mobile connectivity a sure focus. Perhaps they just thought that capitalizing it would give things away. Who knows? The point is that they fixed it, and my faith in the Apple marketing team is restored.

As a side note, I actually think the name itself is just fine. Better than the new “Skinny” branding used at Starbucks, at least.

Apple Takes Over NYTimes Home Page

Awesome Apple ad tonight on the home page of the New York Times site (not sure if this is new). It occupied substantial real-estate under the masthead and down the right side of the page. Starring Justin Long and John Hodgman from the loved/loathed Mac vs. PC commercials, the ad plays with the very architecture and layout of the site. Hodgman climbs up a ladder to append the word “not” at the end of a quote from the Wall Street Journal (“Leopard is better and faster than Vista”).

Totally cool. Completely takes over the site, but does so in such a clever, whimsical manner that keeps it from being annoying. Great way for the Times to put their space to use (and make a nice bit of cash) during a slow news hour on slow news day (Just look at the headlines of the top stories if you doubt this.).

Update: Bob Caswell points out this ad is on the Wall Street Journal, too. Anywhere else?

Here Comes Another Bubble

Joining in on the viral action this morning.

Check out this hilarious video (a parody of Billy Joel’s “We Didn’t Start The Fire” called “Here Comes Another Bubble”) that’s appeared in nearly every single one of my feeds over the last two days.



For the record, I don’t think we’re seeing a bubble, but a funny video is a funny video is a funny video.

And while I’m on the subject of video, you may have noticed that there’s an ever-present sponsored YouTube video at the bottom of the blog pages. I’m testing out this recent addition to the AdSense family. It’s supposed to offer video content relevant to my blog, as well as not-completely-useless advertisements. Let me know if you notice something that seems out of place, lame, or distracting.

I’m trying to find some unobtrusive yet effective ways to make a tiny bit of money on the blog. If anyone has experience with different advertisers or affiliate programs (or better yet, some connections), I’d love to hear about it.

And if you would like to advertise your company/product/service on the site, drop me an email, and we’ll talk.

Ultimately, though, if these things get in the way, I’ll get rid of them in a heartbeat. Let me know, guys. And thanks.

Unfinished Business

Titles of posts I started but never finished:

• Web Apps vs. Desktop Apps And Who Cares If You’re On a Freakin’ Plane!
This was a long one. A response to an article on 37Signals that got a lot of folks riled up. After a lot of writing, I decided I couldn’t finish it. This was before iPhone was released, and I ended up writing a couple related posts later on. One about the early focus on web apps on iPhone, and then one about the forthcoming SDK release.


• Why Does Advertising Exist?
Written around the time of the Future of Online Advertising conference back in June, this post attempted to argue that the future of advertisements was disappearance. I never finished the post, and then a couple weeks ago a bunch of A-listers were blabbing on as though they invented the idea. Too bad I didn’t publish it, otherwise I’d maybe be famous.


• How Do You Want To Die?
This one was set to talk about the taboo surrounding talk of death - specifically, talking about one’s own death.


• Knowing When To Let Go Of An Idea
Probably would have been awesome. But, before finishing it, I took my own advice.


• Ubiquitous Connectivity: How iPod Touch Changes Everything
The idea here was Wi-fi access without the attached strings of a cellular data plan, and how it would have an impact on advertising, ecommerce, social networking, and other stuff. Didn’t make the cut. And now we have the Amazon Kindle, which does exactly this, though over EVDO, which, at the moment, is far more ubiquitous than free Wi-fi. So really, the Kindle changes everything.


• Website Myths: If You Build It They Will Come
I’ll write this one someday, I swear. It’s about watching the analytics on many of my client’s sites, and seeing a steep downwardly-moving traffic trend that correlates precisely with the frequency of updates and the amount of love and attention they devote to their respective sites. Building a website is not like building a storefront. People won’t just walk by, see something cool in the window, and step inside.


• Facebook Photos Suck
True back in February when I first started this. True today.


• Why I Probably Won’t Buy A Kindle (But Will Love It If You Buy It For Me!)
Too much Kindle in one week kept me from finishing this one.

Move On MoveOn.org, Nothing To See Here

I’ve said plenty in the past about both Facebook and privacy on the internet.

And I think it’s pretty clear from my earlier thoughts how I lean on the current debate about Facebook’s new (but not particularly innovative) Beacon advertising platform, and the whole MoveOn.org uproar, so I’ll keep this relatively brief.

Basically, again, people are crying wolf over a loss of privacy when in actuality all that’s been lost is a bit more of the comforting but dangerous illusion of privacy. Facebook Beacon, which allows partner sites to communicate your actions back to Facebook, differs from existing ad networks in only one real way: rather than sending the exact same information to advertisers in the network, they are sending it back to you, making it visible to people with whom you have chosen to share information about yourself by befriending them. Yes, the advertisers get it, too.

And while this increased visibility of your actions can lead to some humorous but unfortunate outcomes - as in the case of a guy girl whose girlfriend boyfriend found out he she bought her him gloves for Christmas (lame present, yo) - this, like the News Feed before it, does not show any information about you that someone couldn’t already see.

Now, this isn’t to say I disagree with calls for further openness of Facebook’s data, and I do think that Facebook creates mini PR nightmares for itself by making these new “features” opt-out instead of opt-in, but this is yet another case of much ado about nothing. It will blow over soon, to be replaced by the next pseudo-scandal, and that won’t be a problem, because nothing has really changed.

Move On, MoveOn.org. Get back to the war. Last I checked, that was still happening.

Quotation Mark Overload

IMG_0242.JPG
Originally uploaded by frivmo

This huge sign on the front of recently-opened Pret a Manger on 6th Avenue and 47th Street, is nothing short of a typographical travesty. It also fails miserably from both a marketing and a linguistic standpoint.

But a sign doesn’t a restaurant make, right? How is the food?

‘Good.’

Where Are All The Brands?

Facebook’s new ad platform is in day two, and I had the chance last night to check it out more thoroughly.

I remain underwhelmed, and am finding it extremely difficult to locate brands, products, and stores to befriend. With over a 45 minutes of intense searching, I was only able to locate 10 “pages” of which to become a “fan.” Pretty sad, especially considering that about half of these (I’m talking about the Apple ones) are pretty likely to be fake pages created by some random guy or girl on Facebook. Here’s what I’ve got:


Does Facebook have any sort of verification process for these pages? How do they know that I’m not authorized to create the MySpace page?

And are they going to make these pages easier to find? Or will companies have to pay for this “privilege?”

Can you find more companies? Become my friend and I’ll be able to see them, or just post your list in the comments.

If you’ve got a company or product on Facebook, let me know in the comments and I’ll be your fan. Definitely.

Facebook Revolutionizes Advertising!

Gaping Void

Are you a fan-sumer?

Does that term make you want to stab yourself on the inside of your elbow with an electric-pencil-sharpener-sharpened paper clip?

Well, beware of Facebook these days, dear friend. Today they’ve launched a new advertising initiative aimed at letting you do what you’ve always dreamed of: become an unpaid shill for products and brands you like. And, perhaps even more so, use Facebook to “stalk” Coca Cola or Apple or Product (RED). I know, I know, hold back the tears of joy.

Here's what is changing:

• You now have a way to connect with products, businesses, bands, celebrities and more on Facebook. (You mean aside from the Sponsored Pages and Groups that already existed? Wow! Amazing!)


• Ads should be getting more relevant and more meaningful to you. (Like this one?)
  
• You now have the option to share actions you take on other sites with your friends on Facebook. (More specifically, you have the option to opt-out of sharing actions you take on other sites on a case-by-case basis, which for some will raise privacy concerns, and for others - like me - it will be seen as kinda stupid. )
  

Nick Carr:

Facebook, which distinguished itself by being the anti-MySpace, is now determined to out-MySpace MySpace. It's a nifty system: First you get your users to entrust their personal data to you, and then you not only sell that data to advertisers but you get the users to be the vector for the ads. And what do the users get in return? An animated Sprite Sips character to interact with.

Ultimately, I fail to see how this is new. Or interesting. And I’m sure Facebook will make plenty of money with it, but don’t think advertisers will fare as well. I stand by my assertion that the future of advertising is being shown ads when you are looking for something. Ads as information, not as roadblocks. Yes, I see the value in being able to befriend brands (and I’ve talked about this before, too), but what Facebook’s doing here isn’t new. MySpace has done it forever, and even Facebook has - though they used to charge companies for the “honor” of creating a profile page.

Now, you too can make a page for your product, just like I have here for Frivmo Design (new site on the way soon, by the way!).

Some screenshots:





More discussion here.

Editor Of Wired Blocking Crappy PR Email

Chris Anderson, Editor in Chief of Wired Magazine and author of the influential “The Long Tail (Why the Future of Business is Selling Less of More),” has just done something remarkable on his blog.

He has posted the email address to dozens and dozens of PR people who have sent him “something inappropriate at some point in the past 30 days,” and which he has added to his blocked list in Outlook. Hardcore.

Anderson says he only wants two kinds of email: “those from people I know, and those from people who have taken the time to find out what I'm interested in and composed a note meant to appeal to that (I love those emails; indeed, that's why my email address is public).” And he doesn’t care if publishing this list of emails leads to them getting picked up by spammers. Reap what you sow, I guess.

Anderson also says that there is no getting off the list. If you want to email him, you’ll have to send from another address.

It’d be awesome if tech writers and other bloggers/journalists started contributing to this list (wiki-style, perhaps) of PR people who send boilerplate junk to any semi-relevant address they can find (or pay for). If this takes hold, and hundreds of people start adding these addresses to their own blocked lists, some real change in outdated and spam-like tactics might start to change. PR people will stop paying exorbitant amount of money for shadily-aggregated email lists because they won’t be effective. Another great side effect would be increased ease of telling apart the good from the bad. Which service is likely to be better - one that sends some boilerplate b.s. to 100,000 bloggers, or one that sends a nice, personal email to targeted people explaining why their service is relevant to the writer and his/her readers? Tough question, I know.

Here’s the list:

aaron@sunshinesachs.com
acoffaro@fortythreepr.com
actionengine@techmarket.com
admin@cartipostale.ro
adrian.richardson@ar-edelman.com
agarson@taylorpr.com
aheng@moca-nyc.org
alerts@alerts.shephard.co.uk
alessandra@livingdivani.it
alex@highwatergroup.com
alexanne.brown@edelman.com
amaury.laporte@diplomatie.gouv.fr
announcements@dmi.org
apartmenttherapy@app.topica.com
as@thehalogroup.net
athierer@pff.org
awaitkunas@gmail.com
bbrignac@tunheim.com
becky@mediafirst.net
blogworldexpo@gmail.com
bobkatz@easidemographics.com
bounces@darklight.ie
bozenawilkspr@aol.com
broesler@5wpr.com
brranko@gmail.com
bruce@newnetworks.com
bulletin@safe-democracy.org
burrill_life_sciences_media_group@vnh10.net
business_travel_news@vnh10.net
callcenter_events@tig.cmptechnetwork.com
carol.tong@bitepr.com
ccashin@laforce-stevens.com
cemerson@webershandwick.com
cheryl.taylor@chorion.co.uk
chilife@topica.email-publisher.com
chilife1@topica.email-publisher.com
chris@iwebtrack.com
chris@onnetusa.com
chriskeswani@onnetusa.com
chuck@broadwick.com
clay.agee@intermarkgroup.com
clickabilitycentral@nl.clickability.com
cmarch@shiftcomm.com
cmoreno@5wpr.com
cmsprmv@yahoo.com
connect@mailer.idgconnect.com
contact@freenyc.net
contact@mecfilms.com
contact@thejsf.org
cw@email.computerweekly.com
cynthia@emediadynamics.com
dan@onewordphotography.com
danielaschrier@rationalpr.com
danielle@popculturepr.com
dasrate@5wpr.com
davenetz@wallstcom.com
david.cross@ableton.com
david@banktrack.org
dbakker@kirvindoak.com
dberry@5wpr.com
dealmakermedia@response.whatcounts.com
dehartdottie@aol.com
dhenderson@peterlangone.ccsend.com
dice_newsmail-bounces@virtual-hideout.net
dkadakia@inventures.com
dkogan@rsowens.com
domondond@thirteen.org
drumbeat@comminit.com
ecomxpo@theonlinexpo.com
edison.lee@ogilvypr.com
editor@more.punchstock.com
eflyer@choicecutsonline.com
ekannett@sspr.com
email@dealmakermedia.com
emails@agencyaccess.com
engnews-bounces@rfanews.org
enotes@amnh.org
equalitynews@feitventures.com
erik@erikalmasphotography.com
evan@themarketingdivision.net
events@freenyc.net
events@mail.homeplug.org
events@sensesf.com
facilitator@americaspeaks.org
feedback@t-shirtsearchengine.com
financo@financo.com
fllamas@webershandwick.com
fttf@mww.com
gina.ghensi@analysys.com
guestlist@lushonline.com
hcohm@lgphilips-lcd.com
heather.mumm@fleishman.com
henk@isomedia.com
india-now@ibef.org
info.freespeech@gmail.com
info@artexpo.nu
info@asetek.com
info@cceia.org
info@csi-annual-event.p0.com
info@designboost.se
info@goodforparty.com
info@involver.com
info@policyinnovations.org
info@sustainabletable.org
info@tagonline.org
info@wordaffairs.com
internet@rsf.org
invest-now@ibef.org
is@news.imagesource.com
jamie.adams@ciscopress.com
jasperwireless@techmarket.com
jbrown@stantoncrenshaw.com
jdorfman@vivavi.com
jelena@crosbyvolmer.com
jennifer@credibilitybranding.com
jessica.tuquero@dc-intl.com
jgadley@gmi-mr.com
jill@market2world.com
jm@pmgintl.com
jmclaughlin@sspr.com
jmedrano@execforum.net
jmke.madshrimps@gmail.com
jmke@madshrimps.be
jneu@webershandwick.com
jodie@mpogd.com
john@larkinvolpatt.com
johnswren@aol.com
jonas.thornholm@xcerion.com
jorgen.nordin@end2endmobile.com
jroberts@hwhpr.com
jscoggins@doc.gov
julie@liaisonpr.com
julie@softscribeinc.com
justsystems@techmarket.com
kamika@sutherlandgold.com
katie@contosdunne.com
katie@fortythreepr.com
kcabrera@carabinerpr.com
kell@taylorcurtismedia.com
kelsi@investorscircle.net
kevin.johnson@techimage.com
kevind@text100.com
kfoley@coynepr.com
kim@scottandscottllp.com
klipsch@vnewscenter.com
klister@pr-vantage.com
krisj@geminiinc.com
krista@montageagency.com
kristen@hensonconsulting.com
kristien@prioritypr.net
kristin.coleman@morris-king.com
kszarkowitz@mporia.com
kthomas@thomas-pr.com
kwarman@b2zentertainment.com
kzox@nycap.rr.com
laurelkao@comcast.net
lauren@perkettpr.com
lauren@piercemattie.com
laurie@highwatergroup.com
lcapurro@jmprpublicrelations.com
leighnofi@sironline.com
levi@meiff.com
liaisonpr@liaisonpr.com
license@hypetraxx.com
lighthouse-list@independent.org
list@freepress.net
listmaster@soex.org
lkornblatt@sspr.com
llomasky@webershandwick.com
locone-bounces@dna-nyc.info
louis@future-works.com
lpalmer@comminit.com
lsambells@pressoffice.targetwire.com
maeilnews@mk.co.kr
mail@atoa.ws
mail@billiondollarbabes.com
mail@lensmodern.com
mail@pff.org
mailers@marketingmatters.net
mailman-bounces@box153.bluehost.com
mantos@sspr.com
marc@mail2.zogby.com
marge_casey__associates_rqbsrgb@cmpgnr.com
mark@choicecutsonline.com
marlenecheetahlearning@rogers.com
marquiswhoswho@email.marquiswhoswho.com
matt.otepka@104west.com
mchase@calysto.com
mclean@rodmclean.com
mcraig@ringling.edu
mdepoint@tunheim.com
mediacenter7@rothmedia.org
mediarelationsbounce@amnh.org
megang@mbooth.com
meghan@artfinancepartners.com
melissa.robbins@mtvnmix.com
melissa@pepcom.com
menziesbob@lages.com
mertine@melmpr.ccsend.com
messa@americanarab.com
michaeli@hwhpr.com
mika@platformlondon.org
mktinfo@pmai.org
mkusa@marketing.agefotostock.com
mlevine@lcoonline.com
morgan@allisonpr.com
morgan@gregoryfca.com
msg@msgnyc.com
mwalker@mww.com
news@metku.net
news@platformfestival.com
news@uiuc.edu
news@velocityreviews.com
news@vmagazine.com
news1@eprairie.com
news2@eprairie.com
newsbot@tweaktown.com
newsletter#27963.169@pink.nimbussoftware.com
newsletter@fineartamerica.com
newsletter@glass-inspiration.com
newsletter@worldsecuritynetwork.net
newsletters@chicblvd.com
newsletters@webshots.online.com
newwest@newwest.net
nfabris@corp.abiresearch.com
niewalda@kurzfilmtage.de
nikki@chicblvd.com
noe@future-works.com
no-reply@wetpaintmail.com
offers@mercurynews.com
ollie@commontime.ccsend.com
online_resources@cxolyris.cxomedia.com
paarmstrong@myspace.com
palm_software_newsletters@news.palmnewsletters.com
pam@techmarket.com
pandreu@5wpr.com
pattyb@gruman-nicoll.com
paula@kohnkecomm.com
pedro2nd@hotmail.com
petertulba@spe.sony.com
phil@contosdunne.com
photomonday@peterhollander.com
pih@bankinvest.dk
pine&gilmore@strategichorizons.com
pr@adremsoft.com
pr@elcomsoft.com
pr@mayocommunications.com
pr@welcomm.com
pr@xcerion.com
press@creditcovers.com
press@diacenter.org
press@freepress.net
press@lebook.com
press-bounces@taxjustice-usa.org
proctor@anet.net
promo@email.batteries.com
publications@houlihan-lokey.com
publicity@justrockpr.us
q@varnishfineart.com
qualcomm@qualcomm.com
rachel@inspire-communications.com
raghu.madabushi@opco.com
renata.guazzi@r-w.it
reply@reply.marketingsherpa.com
reply-34374@uptilt.com
resposito@5wpr.com
rexmore@themarketingdivision.net
rferguson@stantoncrenshaw.com
rferguson@thinkequity.com
rhart@nine-patch.com
rich@contosdunne.com
rick@montageagency.com
rippmedia@aol.com
robert.reeve@videojug.com
robertj@gymr.com
roger.howie@zaha-hadid.com
rpopko@webershandwick.com
rscanlan@gmail.com
rstephenson@cleanair-coolplanet.org
rsvp@believingisseeing.tv
rsvp@sonnenschein.com
s.goodrich@niveusmedia.com
salesinfo@diskeeper.com
sarah@caromarketing.com
scfowler@20m.ccsend.com
scleland@precursor.com
scoggin@waggeneredstrom.com
scover@crownpr.net
send78-proxymedia@caedefensefund.org
service@outpost.com
sfedulow@gcigroup.com
shannons@ferencomm.com
shipserv_newsflash@mail.vresp.com
stannenberger@mprm.com
stephanietrussell@gmail.com
steve@madeit.com
support@projectcamelot.org
swood@inxpo.com
syreeta@sparkpr.com
talentinfo@stocklandmartel.com
talia.andrews@fusionpr.com
ten@firstbornmultimedia.com
terrece.walker@mtvnmix.com
tesco.online@agboville.aviso.ci
tgould@shazaaam.com
thamer@delianet.com
thecallcenterschool@tallent.com
thesterlingreport@topica.email-publisher.com
thinking_out_loud@enews.1up.com
thomas.trenker@filmangelsclub.com
tim.billings@morris-king.com
tina@letoile-pr.de
tom.steiner@edelman.com
tomd@stylegroup.com
tribalddb_sydney@tribalddb.rsys1.com
trichardson@mrb-pr.com
tstadnicki@alphamediagroup.com
ttg-news@tweaktown.com
tvnewsday@tvnewsday.com
unitydeals@unityelectronics.com
update@activate.us
virtualworldsforum@dynamail.co.uk
vivek@rapleaf.us
wachovia.economics@wachovia.com
walmart@newsletters.walmart.com
wfeek@comminit.com
yj@onnetusa.com
yyamashita@lippetaylor.com
zingrec@zingmagazine.com

Great Artists Steal, Right?

Too funny. Engadget brings us this classic case of marketing “me-too.” Sony’s ad for the new CyberShot DSC-T2 camera looks, uh, just a little bit familiar...

What’s next? Maybe this:

Google Music Coming Soon? Ever?

What if Google started to index MP3 files (and display them prominently when you search for an artist or album)?

How would that work?
Who would lose out?
Who would win?

How might adding music (to the existing YouTube, Orkut, and forthcoming secret stuff) boost Google’s social networking cred?

How would this fit in to Google’s long-term focus on mobile computing?

What if you could click one link to preview, and click another to purchase and download (automatically) from Amazon/Apple/EMusic/????

What else?

Is this even a possibility?

What Happens When Computers Are Smarter Than You?

HolyCow brings a fantastic thought-provoking post about what the future might look like, taking as its premise the fast-increasing intelligence of machines and its effects on marketing, business, and life. Right now, computers are about as smart as flies, and at the current rate of increase (doubling every two years) they will reach human-level intelligence by 2019. After that?

Well, once you have a PC on your desk that is as "intelligent" as you are...and they're doubling in power every two years...in two years it'll be TWICE as smart as you. In four years, FOUR times as smart. In six years, EIGHT TIMES as smart as you – the future may be less about what we do as a race – but what happens to us as a consequence of the technology we have created.

Scary? Maybe. But being afraid doesn’t get us anywhere. Asking questions about things does. Here are the eight points discussed, with a short comment on each. Check out the full post on HolyCow for some more insights.

1. Your being observed: Web 3.0
When the computer knows enough about you to make a suggestion about what you should or shouldn’t do today, will you let it? Will you trust it?


2. Privacy
We make more and more information about ourselves available on a near-daily basis. When, if at all, will there be a backlash, and how will our notions of private vs. public continue to change. What kind of trade-offs will we make between freeing data and gaining functionality. Do we own our own online identities?


3. Natural Inflation
Distinctions between the “real” or “natural” and the “synthetic” or “digital” continue to be exploited, with that which is seen as Natural inevitably winning out. But are these distinctions arbitrary, and will increasingly organic, embedded technologies begin to erase these boundaries?


4. Retail becomes theatre
Happening now. Exciting, because we’re getting some great experiences. Unsettling, because it’s harder to tell when we’re being sold something.


5. Brand Darwinism
The marketplace conversation is just beginning to reach critical mass, with sites like Amazon highly encouraging reviews and discussions about products and services. Brands need to be able to engage their customers in this dialog in an honest, transparent way, and respond openly to their concerns in order to survive in this distributed marketplace.


6. Superficial Knowledge
Google and Wikipedia and smart machines eliminate the need for trivial knowledge, leaving humanity more time to debate the important questions of existence.


7. Rise in the fantastical
In the future, everyone will be an artist.


8. The Living Dead
The secret to eternal life lies in the digital realm. Pixel Zombies.

Web TV

There’s something about watching television shows over the internet that makes commercials absolutely unbearable. Even though a network like ABC shows far fewer ads online than the ol’ boob tube, these interruptions feel so wrong, so out of place. And because they nicely mark the commercials on the video timeline, you’re left to count down the seconds until the next break. Couple this with the fact that these shows are still filmed and edited with traditional time allowances in mind (doing the well-known “fade to black, fade back in, and repeat the previous scene a little bit” every few minutes), and you get an experience that is odd, to say the least. ABC even makes you click to continue watching the show once the ad has ended. Why? Just in case I left to get a drink and pee during the commercial like I do when I watch your shows in the living room? In that case, thanks, I guess. But it’s still annoying, especially if I am watching the ad. If I want to pee, I know where the pause button is.

Like reading books on computer screens, television on the web doesn’t quite feel right just yet. But I don’t think I can ever go back to 18 minutes of commercials during an hour-long show. Somehow, taking forty-three minutes of my time (versus sixty) seems much, much more reasonable, even if it’s still a little awkward.

NYTimes On The Future Of Advertising

I’ve said it before, but here’s the NYTimes’ take on opt-in advertising:

Now, in a turnabout, advertising is increasingly being presented as entertainment — and surprisingly, the idea of all ads, all the time, is gaining some favor.

We love good commercials and great brand experiences. Come up with something compelling enough - engaging enough, and we’ll watch it and interact and buy stuff.

Make them even better than that, and we will - dare I say it - even pay for them.

I imagine a future in which companies provide valuable content - advertising as product, and product as advertising - and offer it all over, in communities and networks that I already frequent. But it should be there only if I choose to see it. I only want to see ads for a store if I’m looking for a store. I only want to see a video about Wart-Covered Brides From Hell if that’s what I search for. If what your brand has to offer me is engaging, entertaining, innovative, and most of all, relevant, I will love you and tell all of my friends. (From my own post back in June).

When it comes to the Web, there is no longer a hard separation between advertisements and content. Make it true, make it real, and make it fucking amazing.

We’ll do the rest.

TimesSelect To Go Free?

The New York Post is reporting that its decidedly less trashy neighbor paper, The New York Times, might lift its $7.95-a-month paywall on selected new content and archives.

I’ve been enjoying this content free since March, when they allowed unpaid access to subscribers with an email address from an educational institution (as I wrote about here), and it has been awesome. Being able to search the archives of such an important publication and receive more than a few sentences of historic articles and commentary is such a huge benefit.

I think the Times would be taking a great step forward into the Internet age in lifting the fee. Its entire catalog would at last be indexed by search engines, driving traffic to its often very relevant and very authoritative articles - leading to an increase in ad revenue which might offset the money lost by setting its roughly 200,000 paying TimesSelect customers free.

Especially since online ad spending is set to overtake newspapers by 2011, as reported in yesterday’s today’s Financial Times.

Some Ads Aren’t Totally Awful

Technospot.com has compiled a list of what they call “15 Smart Ads You Just Can’t Miss.” Now, that title is just a tad hyperbolic, but the article is worth checking out regardless.

There’s nothing super-amazing about any of these ads (and I’ve seen many that are much better), but each is a case of the designer taking risks with the brand (and somehow - impressively - managing to convince the higher-ups in the company that these risks are worth taking), and coming up with an effective way of setting the product off from the competition. These are pieces that win design awards and critical acclaim. The trouble, however, is that in the print advertising world there are still so few metrics for assessing effectiveness and ROI, and many (designers, marketers, executives) argue that provocative advertisements work less well than simple, clear, call-to-action campaigns that focus on the features of the product instead of attempting to become a conversation piece.

Either way, some of them are pretty cool, which is its own achievement in an age of corporate boilerplate, crappy slogans, and soulless stock photography. I don’t care if your ad works. Just don’t make it awful, and you stand a chance.

Online Video Hits The Mainstream

Marketers, I think it’s time you started shifting some of your ad-spending budget from television to the Web.

The results of a recent Pew Internet study (as reported by Trendspotting) show that a full 57% of Americans have used the internet to watch or download video, with 19% doing so daily.

One out of five Americans watch video online every single day. That is huge.

They’re also sharing links a lot more than I expected (57%, and this goes up to 67% for young users), and about 13% of viewers are choosing to watch commercial material (a whopping 22% of the kiddie set).

YouTube is, of course, the hands-down leader in this segment, with 27% of all users watching videos there, and commanding the eyes of a full 49% of viewers between 18 and 29.

Online video has made it. There’s no turning back now.

Windorphins: Like Endorphins, Except They CAUSE Pain

Kevin Kelleher from GigaOM perfectly sums up my feelings about eBay’s insanely awful “windorphins” marketing blitz.

And yet it was more nausea than euphoria that I felt going to windorphins.com (a domain that eBay actually had to strongarm a journalist into giving up). It’s peppered with video ads that all made me cringe and colorful blobs with blinking eyes, which I guess windorphins are supposed look like. You can even design your own windorph avatar. (Caution: If you try this, do not click on the “jazz hands” tab. It may induce thoughts of suicide.)

Read the rest of the post here. And then buy something on Amazon.com.

Two Perspectives On The Future Of Advertising

Go to them.
Let them come to you.

Two very different philosophies of online advertising. Both have benefits. Both have issues. What’s the solution? I have no clue.

The first is admirable. Go To Them. CBS recently touted its new policy to go where the viewers are with their video content, rather than restrict it to their own little network ghetto. They saw value in YouTube, MySpace, and all the many video sharing and file hosting sites on the web and have decided to put their content there - where the users already are. Great idea, no question. Consumers are going to watch what they want to watch where they want to watch it, and if your content happens to be there for them to choose from - great! If not, what are the chances you can get them to come to your site every day, with so much competing for their attention? Not good, that’s what your chances are. Very few companies can establish themselves as a destination on the web, and CBS has realized that achieving this end isn’t worth their time, money, and effort. They understand the incredible value in allowing users to control the environment in which they view content. So Go To Them seems like a good thing.

But there is a negative side to it, a potential to take this concept too far. Go To Them is also the philosophy used by marketers who tout the power of brand ubiquity, who encourage large, invasive banner ads and roadblocks and Flashy, loud, screaming commercials. These folks also push the benefits of Google AdWords - of showing ads for your content in “non-intrusive” (yeah, right) ways to increase brand recognition and favorability. Go To Them is the mantra of what I am calling Forced Opt-In ads. There’s probably a real name for ads of this type, but they’re basically of the “Resistance is Futile” family. There’s no way to avoid them (well, there are some Firefox extensions that help, but generally you’re stuck.) and they just get in the way if you’re not looking for what they have to offer.

But then we have Let Them Come To You which offers some benefits as well. The positive aspects of this approach include a responsibility to create extremely compelling content that generates buzz - driving traffic to your site, raising interest in your product, and creating a community around your brand that takes your product elsewhere and evangelizes for you practically free. Advertising this way encourages holistic solutions - web, print, interactive, video, contest, giveaways - anything and everything to get others excited about your stuff. A lot of really innovative campaigns use this approach (case in point: Burger King’s Subservient Chicken website, which was a major viral hit despite never being advertised in conventional media outlets.), and a lot of risks are taken.

Negatives? This approach is risky, resource-intensive, often harder to manage and a measure, and can be majorly frustrating and lead to quitting when the people don’t end up coming to you. It’s hard to be authentic. And even harder to trick users - try this and you’re in for something awful. One bad experience with this approach can create a very bitter taste in the mouths of those who paid for the campaign, and these people (sadly, I know) are very important. But a success can completely transform a brand into more than a composite of its products. A brand can become a lifestyle, an event, a destination, an environment. Your product can be your advertising.

I’d be dishonest if I pretended to know which way things were headed. What I personally would like to see is a bit of a combination of both approaches, which could be problematic. My vision might completely contradict itself, and what I just said above, but I’m okay with that and hope you’ll point it out.

I imagine a future in which companies provide valuable content - advertising as product, and product as advertising - and offer it all over, in communities and networks that I already frequent. But it should be there only if I choose to see it. I only want to see ads for a store if I’m looking for a store. I only want to see a video about Wart-Covered Brides From Hell if that’s what I search for. If what your brand has to offer me is engaging, entertaining, innovative, and most of all, relevant, I will love you and tell all of my friends. And an endorsement from a friend is far, far more valuable than anything else you could possibly stick in front of a face.

If Google or some other social networks use the data I readily provide them to target ads when I ask for ads, I will be happy and I will buy stuff. And I will come back. And I will want to become part of your brand ecosystem. I will sign up for updates and ask for a personalized RSS feed of product offers I’m interested in. I will create a profile on your site and invite my friends and add your widget to my blog and be loyal. But only if everything remains on my terms. The minute this trust and respect is betrayed is the minute you lose a customer - 100 customers - for life.

Be nice. Don’t yell at me. I will call you when I’m ready. Until then, make some cool ads that I will decide to watch in my free time.