When a 14 year old kid can blow up your business in his spare time, not because he hates you but because he loves you, then you got a problem.
- Gordy Thompson, manager of internet services at the New York Times in 1993 quoted by Clay Shirky in Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 16th, 2009
- Category: Business, Journalism, New models, Open source/IP/DRM, Quotes, Web/Tech
- Comments: None
Quote to remember
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 15th, 2009
- Category: Reading & Bookmarks
- Comments: None
links for 2009-03-15
-
very stupid indeed, and I thought newspapers have shuffled with the times a bit further than this!
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 13th, 2009
- Category: Reading & Bookmarks
- Comments: 3
links for 2009-03-13
-
a very misguided article for many reasons. the ultimate is holding up 'french capitalism' as an example. Shurely shome mishtake?!
-
useful to remind to geeks in one's life
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 12th, 2009
- Category: Reading & Bookmarks
- Comments: None
links for 2009-03-12
-
this is pretty gruesome… you have to opt-out of the company sharing your personal data! and it's not exactly easy for some customers, it seems
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 11th, 2009
- Category: Reading & Bookmarks
- Comments: None
links for 2009-03-11
-
onion is getting scarily real, being too funny by just adding a little bit of humour. Doesn't say much good about reality…
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 10th, 2009
- Category: Reading & Bookmarks
- Comments: None
links for 2009-03-10
-
interesting, though it seems the ending is more a wishful thinking.
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 10th, 2009
- Category: Business, Marketing, Trends, Web/Tech
- Comments: 6
Brands are not good for your health
Two paragraphs explaining why (brand) websites are dead:
Look at this. It’s a Bovril website. With a breath-taking circularity of irony (or perhaps secret plea for help from a web designer), the site’s strapline (and perhaps the brand’s slogan) is ‘give me strength’. And, indeed, what on God’s earth is the point of all this? And who thought it was a good idea (apart from the agency that created it)?
Don’t get me wrong, once you’re there, it’s quite nicely done, graphically interesting etc. But why would anyone ever go there? Even if it wasn’t difficult to use, I still wouldn’t treat it as my number 1 source of information about Bovril itself (that would be Wikipedia), Bovril recipes (is that a thing?) (I’d start in Google and since the site isn’t search engine-friendly, it doesn’t show up), outdoorsiness (ditto, you’d never get there and if you did you wouldn’t stay long because of the thiny veiled comtempt for this audience), or even gurning cows. It’s just bizarre.
Come to think of it, brands are bizarre too. This is what Tom Hopkins has further to say about brands:
But they are a method of communication not an issuer of communication. They are talking points, they are social tokens, they are items of self expression.
I disagree. There is a lot of earnest talking – mostly by marketing and advertising people – about how people want to engage with brands. I certainly don’t want to engage with brands.
I want to talk to – not ‘engage’ with – the person I may be buying things from, or someone who can help me learn more or get me more information about product or service I am interested in. And that is invariably not the brand, with its useless websites, ad and marketing campaigns that interrupt and annoy the hell out of me.
I want to talk to an expert who’ll educate me about food, wine, travel, fashion, cameras, plumbing, perhaps even washing powder, if that’s what I am interested in. And agencies just get in the way of such interactions. Just look what they have done with websites – a pandemic of branded flash-ridden monstrosities, eating load time and bandwidth, with a graphic designer’s wet dream splashing across your screen. Grrrr.
I want to talk to and possibly relate on an ongoing basis with people – individuals, not departments! – within organisations that I might choose to supply me with products and services. My advice to them is know who you are and what you are trying to do, then understand what people – individuals, not consumers! – do and want, and then treat them with respect and understanding. You will get the same in return. That is far more valuable for the long term health of your business (and customers!) than any brand campaign.
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 7th, 2009
- Category: Reading & Bookmarks
- Comments: None
links for 2009-03-07
-
tomtom being sued by M$, which is also an attack on LINUX
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 6th, 2009
- Category: Reading & Bookmarks
- Comments: None
links for 2009-03-06
-
this is one of those times when customer is not always right but the way to go is not to bad reviews but educate people about what is a good doctor and what isn't, beyond just their immediate experience. Tough but necessary
-
agreed, aggravated users should be treated this way. just because the company is huge and successful and users sometimes ignorant, overreacting or even stupid, doesn't mean they deserve to be ignored.
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 5th, 2009
- Category: Reading & Bookmarks
- Comments: 1
links for 2009-03-05
-
"Being constantly scrutinized undermines our social norms; furthermore, it's creepy. Privacy isn't just about having something to hide; it's a basic right that has enormous value to democracy, liberty, and our humanity."
-
This has just been elevated to my Pantheon of 'must read' pieces.
-
good if inconclusive article. annoyingly, still talk of 'consumers' addicted to free content. Oh boy, 'consumers' who also produce and distribute ain't consumers no more. media industry can't accept that though. better would be looking into 'because of' model – making money 'because of' something, not 'with' something. That means rewiring business models across the board, which is harder than blaming 'consumers' and the interwebs.
-
An interesting article about word of mouth marketing in pharmaceutical products. Rather common sense and obvious but you'd need to move away from the traditional 'channel' or even the newer 'influencer' thinking, which seems hard for marketers. Also, from the point of 'relationships' with the community, influencers and other 'nodes' in social networks, the traditional thinking about authority and credibility based mostly on hierarchical or channel models breaks down. And more importantly, the methods used by marketers to try this new 'word-of-mouth' approach are also flawed – they look for self-proclaimed influencers, which causes what I call the Schrödinger's cat effect in marketing or surveys – the observed is impacted by the act of observation
-
this is cool
Quote to remember
The World Wide Web sits on top of a turtle, and then below that is an older turtle, and that sits on the older turtle. You don’t have to feel fretful about that situation — because it’s turtles all the way down.
- Bruce Sterling in What Bruce Sterling Actually Said About Web 2.0 at Webstock 09
- Author: Adriana
- Published: Mar 3rd, 2009
- Category: Reading & Bookmarks
- Comments: None
links for 2009-03-03
-
does it mean that community is provided as a service the same way software is? I.e. doesn't belong to me and I can't really drive it. SaaS takes the 'provider' model to extremes. nothing is 'owned' by the users. Community as a service modelled on that is pushing social interactions the opposite direction I want to go. I want to enable, not provide (a service).
-
good points, i agree with it
-
ghastly stuff, no wonder car salesmen have such a bad rep!



Recent Comments