I hesitated before buying a Fisher Price product. I already have a bad impression of this brand as being associated with poor quality products. My latest experience, buying a "Kid Tough" Fisher Price digital camera for my four year-old has reinforced my negative opinion. This camera is a piece of junk.
The ergonomics attracted me to the device, first suggested by my mother. My daughter loves taking pictures but we worry about her holding our "expensive" digital camera because she has a tendency to swing it around... So the idea behind "kid tough" is that the camera is easier for small hands and built to take the likely bonks from dropping or swinging.
Three fatal flaws:
1) The camera provides an easy to use two-eye viewer for selecting the shot (think binoculars) -- BUT the image shown doesn't line up with the image the camera takes. Result - heads always cut off in photos.
2) Simple anti-jitter software would have helped an enormous amount -- come on! Kids are not going to stand still to take pictures! And with the slow shutter speed of the cheap ccd they used, every photo comes out blurry.
3) Speaking of cheap ccd -- advertised as 1.3 megapixels, don't miss the word "interpolated" -- which is to say, the photos are all very grainy.
No more Fisher Price for this household! It may be inexpensive, but junk at any price is a waste of money!
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Monday, December 17, 2007
What is the story with CLEAR?
So I signed up for the new airport program called "CLEAR" and today at the SFO Northwest Airlines terminal I had my first experience... But now I just want to know what it is all about! Is this just an elaborate way to cut in line at the airport security line? I still had to go through the regular security procedures, like any other traveller... What is the story? Is this a half-implemented system?
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Starry Plough
wasting away at the starry plough in Berkeley instead of being at the creative commons party..
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Twitter and T-Mobile
A new case study for conversational media is created every day. This time it is a conflict between a wireless operator and and an Internet startup. Another case of a network operator blocking the free and open Internet? YES says Chief Twitter Biz Stone on the Get Satisfaction website, one of the first places the question arose. NO says T-Mobile's official customer service answer which is that the problem is with Twitter.
The story is now in all the major blogs and forums. Twitter is actively engaging in the conversation, spreading their side of the story that T-Mobile has blocked them. So far T-Mobile hasn't shown up to the conversation to tell their side of the story. If T-Mobile doesn't respond and solve the problem, it will be in mainstream news outlets by the beginning of the week, and a much bigger headache for them. Given the sensitivity over "net neutrality" issues, it could end up being a part of a congressional hearing. That is definitely NOT the kind of PR that T-Mobile wants.
There are two important questions that a company like T-Mobile should be asking right now (or at least after the fact). How is that we allowed this bad decision to be made and implemented, which would clearly be visible to our customers and would make them mad? And how is it that our communications department wasn't on top of this issue?
UPDATE: Great letter from a T-Mobile customer to the CEO of T-Mobile...
The story is now in all the major blogs and forums. Twitter is actively engaging in the conversation, spreading their side of the story that T-Mobile has blocked them. So far T-Mobile hasn't shown up to the conversation to tell their side of the story. If T-Mobile doesn't respond and solve the problem, it will be in mainstream news outlets by the beginning of the week, and a much bigger headache for them. Given the sensitivity over "net neutrality" issues, it could end up being a part of a congressional hearing. That is definitely NOT the kind of PR that T-Mobile wants.
There are two important questions that a company like T-Mobile should be asking right now (or at least after the fact). How is that we allowed this bad decision to be made and implemented, which would clearly be visible to our customers and would make them mad? And how is it that our communications department wasn't on top of this issue?
UPDATE: Great letter from a T-Mobile customer to the CEO of T-Mobile...
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Why I think the Blog Council is a Good Idea
Let me begin by saying that I am entirely supportive of:
1) Big companies engaging in the blogosphere
2) Big companies recognizing that they have distinct challenges in engaging authentically and transparently in the blogosphere, which is to say in a useful and effective manner
and
3) Big companies talking to each other about these challenges
therefore, I can only be wholly supportive of an initiative like the one described in this press release announcing the creation of the "Blog Council," a group organized to facilitate having big companies who are already blogging, and have significant blogs, to talk about their challenges in doing so.
One thing I am NOT supportive of, is big companies seeing blogs (and conversational media more generally) as a new "channel" to do "marketing." I don't believe that the blog council intends to promote that idea, but I do think it is at the heart of the healthy ongoing debate in the blogosphere about the creation of the Blog Council.
Forget "blogging" for a moment. What is happening in the world right now, with the Internet as its midwife, is the re-emergence of core human behaviors in markets, transposed into a time and space independent global world.
Unfolded one more level:
Transactions in markets have historically (pre-industrial age) been driven by trust, which is established through reputation, social networks, and word of mouth. The industrial age alienated us as "consumers" from this core sociology of markets. For the past 150 years we have increasingly been asked to establish "trust" on the basis of mass media (public relations) and advertising.
But the past 30 years have undone the previous 100 -- first the evolution of the PERSONAL computer, then the expansion of the Internet, along comes accessibility via the Web, and then the mainstream adoption of online communities -- all leading to the re-emergence of our very human desire to establish trust from peers, not from the media or advertising.
And so what is a marketer to do when the very definition of marketing is being turned on its head? One possible route, and the one that is so vociferously being opposed, is to try and use the new medium like the old -- use blogs to market TO people.
Using a press release to communicate, talking about "tactics," operating behind closed doors, creating private groups that lack transparency in their operations and membership -- these are all the hallmarks of the old, and not the new. These do not establish authentic peer trust in markets.
I believe that this is why so many have been so critical of the start that the Blog Council has made for itself in the world. But it is not too late, it is never too late. The Blog Council can become more transparent, be more about conversations with markets, be more about the core set of reasons that it seems to have been created to serve -- big companies figuring out how to engage in this new medium. A starting point would be to engage with the critics and have a conversation.
1) Big companies engaging in the blogosphere
2) Big companies recognizing that they have distinct challenges in engaging authentically and transparently in the blogosphere, which is to say in a useful and effective manner
and
3) Big companies talking to each other about these challenges
therefore, I can only be wholly supportive of an initiative like the one described in this press release announcing the creation of the "Blog Council," a group organized to facilitate having big companies who are already blogging, and have significant blogs, to talk about their challenges in doing so.
One thing I am NOT supportive of, is big companies seeing blogs (and conversational media more generally) as a new "channel" to do "marketing." I don't believe that the blog council intends to promote that idea, but I do think it is at the heart of the healthy ongoing debate in the blogosphere about the creation of the Blog Council.
Forget "blogging" for a moment. What is happening in the world right now, with the Internet as its midwife, is the re-emergence of core human behaviors in markets, transposed into a time and space independent global world.
Unfolded one more level:
Transactions in markets have historically (pre-industrial age) been driven by trust, which is established through reputation, social networks, and word of mouth. The industrial age alienated us as "consumers" from this core sociology of markets. For the past 150 years we have increasingly been asked to establish "trust" on the basis of mass media (public relations) and advertising.
But the past 30 years have undone the previous 100 -- first the evolution of the PERSONAL computer, then the expansion of the Internet, along comes accessibility via the Web, and then the mainstream adoption of online communities -- all leading to the re-emergence of our very human desire to establish trust from peers, not from the media or advertising.
And so what is a marketer to do when the very definition of marketing is being turned on its head? One possible route, and the one that is so vociferously being opposed, is to try and use the new medium like the old -- use blogs to market TO people.
Using a press release to communicate, talking about "tactics," operating behind closed doors, creating private groups that lack transparency in their operations and membership -- these are all the hallmarks of the old, and not the new. These do not establish authentic peer trust in markets.
I believe that this is why so many have been so critical of the start that the Blog Council has made for itself in the world. But it is not too late, it is never too late. The Blog Council can become more transparent, be more about conversations with markets, be more about the core set of reasons that it seems to have been created to serve -- big companies figuring out how to engage in this new medium. A starting point would be to engage with the critics and have a conversation.
Why do I stick with Blogger?
Nostalgia, I guess. Or Google PageRank :-) I started my first Blogger account on August 15th, 2000. The first set of posts aren't even available anymore. Originally I had created several different blogs for different topics and then tried to cross-link. Blogger didn't have categories back then. Oh yeah, it still doesn't :-)
How optimistic I was back on August 16th, 2000 when I posted this:
Hey, Google, when will you catch up to Typepad or Wordpress with the feature set? Anyone there? Hello?
How optimistic I was back on August 16th, 2000 when I posted this:
I will try to enter something into this space each morning. I have been thinking about what kinds of things I could possibly say in a "public" diary. As an officer of a public company (Inprise/Borland) I have to be careful not to say anything which the SEC would frown upon -- they don't like it if officers disclose material information about the companies they work for. Nor is it a wise idea to say anything that would indicate expectations on future performance.I wonder if I was the first officer of a public company to start blogging?
Today I am headed to LinuxWorld Expo for the second day.
Hey, Google, when will you catch up to Typepad or Wordpress with the feature set? Anyone there? Hello?
Monday, December 10, 2007
War is Over
It is very hard to do as Jon Burg suggests and watch this video of John Lennon's "Give Peace a chance" campaign all the way through. But I agree with him in strongly recommending that you do. If we learn nothing else from George Bush's Iraq, I hope we learn that war wasn't the answer. The war is over, if you want it.
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Why I hate Joost
So I downloaded the beta of Joost, since I feel a professional responsibility to try these things out and understand what they are trying to accomplish. I came away from Joost profoundly disappointed. I spent half an hour or so watching the adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle with my daughter. The good news -- only two problems. The bad news, they are both deal killers for me.
First, the quality of the picture and sound was very good -- most of the time. There were these sudden glitches where the sound began to stutter or skip and the images would falter. With the enormous investment that has been made in this proprietary technology platform I would have expected it to work a lot better (at least as well as YouTube).
But the real disaster is that they seem to want to duplicate the horrible interrupt advertising model of television. We were tortured with terrible commercial for Coca-cola every few minutes of our viewing experience. Worse yet, unlike the sometimes artful way in which television has evolved to interrupt a show with a commercial (at a natural cliff hanger or break in the action) Joost's ads seemed to be inserted according to a schedule -- even if it meant that the ad appeared in the middle of dialog.
Attention Media Moguls -- I am not returning to interrupt driven television programming. And Coke execs? Your ads make me hate your product and your company. Give it up.
First, the quality of the picture and sound was very good -- most of the time. There were these sudden glitches where the sound began to stutter or skip and the images would falter. With the enormous investment that has been made in this proprietary technology platform I would have expected it to work a lot better (at least as well as YouTube).
But the real disaster is that they seem to want to duplicate the horrible interrupt advertising model of television. We were tortured with terrible commercial for Coca-cola every few minutes of our viewing experience. Worse yet, unlike the sometimes artful way in which television has evolved to interrupt a show with a commercial (at a natural cliff hanger or break in the action) Joost's ads seemed to be inserted according to a schedule -- even if it meant that the ad appeared in the middle of dialog.
Attention Media Moguls -- I am not returning to interrupt driven television programming. And Coke execs? Your ads make me hate your product and your company. Give it up.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Poor iPhone Sales in Europe
While in Cambridge and London for SVc2UK I asked a number of different people -- students, professors, entrepreneurs and even taxi drivers -- how the iPhone was being received in Europe. Everyone agreed that it was an attractive device, but no one thought that it could satisfy their needs! Here is a list of reasons given that show the differences between the US and European mobile markets:
Slow network speed
Low camera resolution
No ability to record movies
No GPS
No integration with automobile mobile
Can't use Bluetooth to move files around...
This last one was especially interesting -- a few people told me that they now use their mobiles as storage devices for files -- word or powerpoint documents -- so that when they are at a meeting they can say "oh, let me transfer this white paper to your computer via bluetooth." Wow. I hadn't even thought of doing that with my mobile!
Slow network speed
Low camera resolution
No ability to record movies
No GPS
No integration with automobile mobile
Can't use Bluetooth to move files around...
This last one was especially interesting -- a few people told me that they now use their mobiles as storage devices for files -- word or powerpoint documents -- so that when they are at a meeting they can say "oh, let me transfer this white paper to your computer via bluetooth." Wow. I hadn't even thought of doing that with my mobile!
| |||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
![[i] link by personafile | visit personafile.com | #5903](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_ugOlGbuTxh9vC7tkTRtlkDcU7BIfi8zNRHenDUBTwdApKP_B5stolM7w87Ux0QOdoz2LADeTtUHkf5KL5rFnGfBl683U6z7D8DLzYjs2qFJhTd7YSHiA3rFmpuHp5E0un9Kepdq2Gasm8RknrJZ688CCLaoNuf9OsH2Rowhe2wFYUm_wGDpcK73rkDpi8Ncds1WPl9LAqlJqgH209T9G2XEBWDCNJsqmVocQ=s0-d){kind=small}
Friday, November 23, 2007
Cambridge Union Society (SVC2UK)
On our first evening in Cambridge for the "Silicon Valley comes to the United Kingdom" (SVC2UK) event, we were invited to dine and debate at the Cambridge Union Society. Founded in 1811, the Society formulated the following proposition for the evening:
This house maintains that Europe, not Silicon Valley, will become the best place to build future billion dollar companies."I am sorry to report that your team from Silicon Valley did not prevail in opposing this motion in front of the partisan European audience. However, a wonderful evening for all was experienced by 600 students, faculty, and business people from the Cambridge area.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
SVc2UK
I am so far behind in blogging the events these past few days here in Cambridge. Somehow I thought I'd be able to write about everything as it was happening. But Ellen Levy and Sherry Couto have kept us all on our toes with a tightly packed schedule -- not that I am complaining! I am having an enormous amount of fun at the first ever Silicon Valley Comes to the United Kingdom -- SVc2UK for short!
The event is the joint work of Ellen Levy's new organization,Silicon Valley Connect, (which I expect you will be hearing a lot more about in the months and years to come) and Sherry Couto via her association with the Cambridge Judge school of business and NESTA. Ellen is an incredible person and I feel fortunate to have known and worked with her for over a decade. This is my first time meeting Sherry, and I have thoroughly enjoyed the experience and have a very high regard for her as well. Between the two of them, I expect that just about anything is possible!
And the schedule that they created for us is proof of their amazing abilities. Beginning on Thursday evening with a debate between the Cambridge and Silicon Valley business communities, attended by 600 students and faculty, and continuing through two days of classes at Judge, and countless opportunities to participate in the Cambridge community, I am awed (and exhausted).
I would write more now, but we are off to yet another event and then on to London where we will be engaged in yet more classes.
The event is the joint work of Ellen Levy's new organization,Silicon Valley Connect, (which I expect you will be hearing a lot more about in the months and years to come) and Sherry Couto via her association with the Cambridge Judge school of business and NESTA. Ellen is an incredible person and I feel fortunate to have known and worked with her for over a decade. This is my first time meeting Sherry, and I have thoroughly enjoyed the experience and have a very high regard for her as well. Between the two of them, I expect that just about anything is possible!
And the schedule that they created for us is proof of their amazing abilities. Beginning on Thursday evening with a debate between the Cambridge and Silicon Valley business communities, attended by 600 students and faculty, and continuing through two days of classes at Judge, and countless opportunities to participate in the Cambridge community, I am awed (and exhausted).
I would write more now, but we are off to yet another event and then on to London where we will be engaged in yet more classes.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Silicon Valley Comes to the UK
Tomorrow I will board a United jet to London, on my way there as a guest of Cambridge for an event titled "Silicon Valley Comes to the UK." I am joined by a host of notable Silicon Valley execs, all invited by the expert networker, Ellen Levy.
Our visit starts off with a debate at the Cambridge Union on whether Silicon Valley will remain the place that the "next billion dollar" company will come from. Fellow invitee Reid Hoffman has already started the debate at his company's website.
Friday and Saturday we will be participating in a series of "Master Classes" on a variety of web 2.0, Internet, and general tech entrepreneurship topics -- I'll be blogging from the event, so watch this space!
Our visit starts off with a debate at the Cambridge Union on whether Silicon Valley will remain the place that the "next billion dollar" company will come from. Fellow invitee Reid Hoffman has already started the debate at his company's website.
Friday and Saturday we will be participating in a series of "Master Classes" on a variety of web 2.0, Internet, and general tech entrepreneurship topics -- I'll be blogging from the event, so watch this space!
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Lobby Conning the Palace Hotel
I wonder if there were more people in the "lobby con" or in the main conference? The Palace was packed with badge-less folks. Attached -- a photo of Richard Jalichandra, Technorat's new CEO, standing with past CEO and founder David Sifry.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Does Silicon Valley Matter?
The debate is back (continuing) with this post by the thoughtful Brian Oberkirch commenting on an exchange at the Future of Web Apps and a speech by Paul Graham (also note this follow up from Paul on why to move to a "startup hub")
Here is my reply:
Best thing I ever did — come back to Silicon Valley from Chicago in 1995. I say “back” because I grew up here, then lived in Chicago for over 10 years…
The reasons I came back are the same today:
(1) access to capital. Nowhere on earth is there more money being invested in startups than on Sand Hill Road. And even if they give lip service to investing in other markets, these VCs don’t want to travel and will prefer investments within 20 miles of their houses
(2) access to advice. Nowhere on earth is there a similar concentration of executive expertise in building a startup — all aspects from operations to strategy, to managing personalities — then in Silicon Valley
(3) access to talent. I can’t even recruit in Berkeley as well as I can in Palo Alto, and that is less than 50 miles.
(4) willingness to take risks. everyone in this market “gets it” from the office manager to the CMO, and understands the risk/reward paradigm of startup life
(5) low/no friction — accountants, lawyers, real estate — all know how to deal with startups which in other markets is RARE and sucks up a lot of valuable time
(6) oh yeah, and lastly, synergy with other startups that are doing similar interesting things. Which happens more easily when you see the people all the time in coffee shops, school fundraisers, etc. But you are right - that could happen by being nomadic. The other stuff? not so much.
Want to make your life easier in building a successful web company? Go west young man.
Here is my reply:
Best thing I ever did — come back to Silicon Valley from Chicago in 1995. I say “back” because I grew up here, then lived in Chicago for over 10 years…
The reasons I came back are the same today:
(1) access to capital. Nowhere on earth is there more money being invested in startups than on Sand Hill Road. And even if they give lip service to investing in other markets, these VCs don’t want to travel and will prefer investments within 20 miles of their houses
(2) access to advice. Nowhere on earth is there a similar concentration of executive expertise in building a startup — all aspects from operations to strategy, to managing personalities — then in Silicon Valley
(3) access to talent. I can’t even recruit in Berkeley as well as I can in Palo Alto, and that is less than 50 miles.
(4) willingness to take risks. everyone in this market “gets it” from the office manager to the CMO, and understands the risk/reward paradigm of startup life
(5) low/no friction — accountants, lawyers, real estate — all know how to deal with startups which in other markets is RARE and sucks up a lot of valuable time
(6) oh yeah, and lastly, synergy with other startups that are doing similar interesting things. Which happens more easily when you see the people all the time in coffee shops, school fundraisers, etc. But you are right - that could happen by being nomadic. The other stuff? not so much.
Want to make your life easier in building a successful web company? Go west young man.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
United: Struggling and failing
I flew back from London yesterday on United Airlines. I was excited to have them offer a cheap upgrade to me at check-in so that I was able to move into a business class seat. What a disappointment though!
No wonder they have so many empty seats in business and first that they can offer cheap upgrades -- on my plane, a 747, one of the lavatories in my section was out of order, the power outlet in my seat didn't work, the seat wouldn't stay upright (it kept tipping back), and my footrest wouldn't stay up at all!
Three things that the flight attendants (who are terrific) told me that makes me wonder whether or not I should continue flying on this airline at all:
1) When United flies a "codeshare" flight with its partners, like Lufthansa, as soon as the customers of that other airline find out they are on a United plane they immediately try to change flights and the ones who can't are very upset to be on a crappy plane
2) United doesn't do its own maintenance anymore and so the problems I experienced are "common" according to one flight attendant -- and they just don't get fixed when reported
3) According to one of the members of the flight crew, that old beat up broken down 747 is expected to continue to be one of United's primary workhorses on the London-SFO route for ANOTHER YEAR.
So I am shopping for a new airline. By the look of how empty its planes are, I'll be one of the last rats to abandon ship. Which brings me to another point. Doesn't United understand that by providing a terrible product they are destroying their brand and driving away their most loyal customers?
Hello United, anyone listening?
No wonder they have so many empty seats in business and first that they can offer cheap upgrades -- on my plane, a 747, one of the lavatories in my section was out of order, the power outlet in my seat didn't work, the seat wouldn't stay upright (it kept tipping back), and my footrest wouldn't stay up at all!
Three things that the flight attendants (who are terrific) told me that makes me wonder whether or not I should continue flying on this airline at all:
1) When United flies a "codeshare" flight with its partners, like Lufthansa, as soon as the customers of that other airline find out they are on a United plane they immediately try to change flights and the ones who can't are very upset to be on a crappy plane
2) United doesn't do its own maintenance anymore and so the problems I experienced are "common" according to one flight attendant -- and they just don't get fixed when reported
3) According to one of the members of the flight crew, that old beat up broken down 747 is expected to continue to be one of United's primary workhorses on the London-SFO route for ANOTHER YEAR.
So I am shopping for a new airline. By the look of how empty its planes are, I'll be one of the last rats to abandon ship. Which brings me to another point. Doesn't United understand that by providing a terrible product they are destroying their brand and driving away their most loyal customers?
Hello United, anyone listening?
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Conversations are not marketing
I have been enjoying reading James Cherkoff's blog Modern Marketing which I rushed over to after having met him here in London yesterday morning. He offers this great tidbit from The Conversation Group advisory member David Weinberger:
"Marketing has to change. It has to recognize that market conversations are now the best source of information about companies and their products and services. It has to recognize that those conversations are not themselves marketing — you and me talking about whether we like our new digital cameras is not you and me marketing to each another. Neither is our conversation a "marketing opportunity." But the temptation to see it as such is well nigh impossible for most marketers to resist."You can just imagine somewhere right now there is a marketing department person in some company going around to the product development staff saying "I need 4 blog posts a week from each of you. Go out and pump our product in the blogosphere." The temptation is real -- we in the industry keep saying that getting engaged in the conversation is important, and that the people who should do it are the real people in the business. But it must not be forgotten that this is only a useful activity if it is authentic -- if it is done because the person really wants to participate in the market and has something to add that the market will appreciate as valuable. Just flogging a product is a waste of everyone's time.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Conversing with Airlines
Following up on my post yesterday about conversing with companies, I realized that I have a lot to say to airlines. I just took United's online survey and was very disappointed by the experience. I appreciate that there are specific quality metrics that United is interested in measuring and that they think the only cost effective way to do so is through statistical analysis, but this is VERY dissatisfying as a customer. I have specific feedback and I want to have a conversation with them!
And as a customer, I should be important to them. I am working on my second million miles on their airline and I also frequently fly on their competitors airplanes. So I am an experienced consumer of their product. Given my current projects, I will easily spend $20,000 on airplane tickets next year including domestic and international travel. So why wouldn't they want to know what I have to say?
Furthermore, there has to be the reward of talking to them that comes from (a) feeling like I am being listened to; and (b) that there is some accountability -- someone will do something about the issues I raise. The "reward" for filling out their survey was entry into some ridiculous contest that no one ever wins. That is not a reward, that is an insult.
There are a lot of things I like about United, but I have a few complaints. They would be a better company if the figured out how to converse with their customers and they would win me over as a greater advocate for them. This is a good example of how companies could be engaging in conversational media as an alternative to traditional advertising.
Hello United, anyone listening?
And as a customer, I should be important to them. I am working on my second million miles on their airline and I also frequently fly on their competitors airplanes. So I am an experienced consumer of their product. Given my current projects, I will easily spend $20,000 on airplane tickets next year including domestic and international travel. So why wouldn't they want to know what I have to say?
Furthermore, there has to be the reward of talking to them that comes from (a) feeling like I am being listened to; and (b) that there is some accountability -- someone will do something about the issues I raise. The "reward" for filling out their survey was entry into some ridiculous contest that no one ever wins. That is not a reward, that is an insult.
There are a lot of things I like about United, but I have a few complaints. They would be a better company if the figured out how to converse with their customers and they would win me over as a greater advocate for them. This is a good example of how companies could be engaging in conversational media as an alternative to traditional advertising.
Hello United, anyone listening?
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Want to 'converse' with companies?
I have been thinking about the recent article by Elinor Mills of CNET entitled "Want to 'converse with advertisers? Me neither" which was written as a response to the recent Federated Media conference, CM Summit. Elinor makes a good point in observing that if all companies do is insinuate advertising copy into social media, there efforts will fail. But she doesn't go far enough in discussing the changing relationship between companies and the markets in which they participate.
Elinor can hardly be blamed. The Federated conference continued a long history of marketers talking about what the have done or will do TO the people they are trying to attract or retain as customers. But there were some bright spots in the conference agenda and there are some bright spots in the market and it would be a shame to believe that all companies want to do is stick their advertising into another new medium.
There are actually some companies out there that understand that they have an opportunity to reinvent themselves -- they understand that the future in a post-industrial economy is creating a great experience -- which means a relationship -- which means listening and participating WITH not broadcasting TO the people that used to be called their customers.
The fact that we all have a voice now means that successful companies will learn to listen and talk with the people who are in their markets -- customers, employees, vendors, and even competitors. There will be more transparency, more accountability, and a higher quality experience around the best companies and their products or services.
Product development processes will change. Customer service will change. Vendor and supply chain management will change. Oh yeah, and advertising and public relations will change.
Who wants to 'converse' with companies? I DO! In fact, I can't wait 'till they actually start listening. There are so many things I want to tell them about what doesn't work, what is frustrating, even what they are doing right.
So don't through the conversation baby out with the advertising bath water.
Elinor can hardly be blamed. The Federated conference continued a long history of marketers talking about what the have done or will do TO the people they are trying to attract or retain as customers. But there were some bright spots in the conference agenda and there are some bright spots in the market and it would be a shame to believe that all companies want to do is stick their advertising into another new medium.
There are actually some companies out there that understand that they have an opportunity to reinvent themselves -- they understand that the future in a post-industrial economy is creating a great experience -- which means a relationship -- which means listening and participating WITH not broadcasting TO the people that used to be called their customers.
The fact that we all have a voice now means that successful companies will learn to listen and talk with the people who are in their markets -- customers, employees, vendors, and even competitors. There will be more transparency, more accountability, and a higher quality experience around the best companies and their products or services.
Product development processes will change. Customer service will change. Vendor and supply chain management will change. Oh yeah, and advertising and public relations will change.
Who wants to 'converse' with companies? I DO! In fact, I can't wait 'till they actually start listening. There are so many things I want to tell them about what doesn't work, what is frustrating, even what they are doing right.
So don't through the conversation baby out with the advertising bath water.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Terrific Video (new homepage)
Another "placeholder" web page has gone up at The Conversation Group and with it a really terrific video made by our friend (and member of our BOD) Peter Hirshberg. Peter interviewed Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Sun Microsystems, on blogging. This is a snippet of the conversation which specifically touches on the question of brands "controlling" their image in the market. Summary? In Jonathan's words, "Control is an Illusion"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)