communication. community. cognition.
Posts tagged Marketing
A Cupful of Wisdom
Jul 12th
Soccer is the most boring thing to watch on television.
- America
The cynics are having a field day with the World Cup final, calling Spain’s last-minute-of-overtime 1-0 victory a snoozefest.
I’m not here to argue with them, but it is important to understand why. More >
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
The Wrong Solution

Unearned Legacies
Nov 20th
Yesterday, I pointed out how Facebook’s automated attempts at peppering me with relevant information had the unintended consequence of creating a virtual seance – connecting with the dead. I don’t really blame Facebook per se, because no one has yet filed to archive Scott’s wall as a memorial account. However, there are still major gaps on the road to real relevance that will be critical for communication and networking, and the team that figures out the right algorithm for relevance will have the juice to dethrone anyone. This means you, Google and Facebook.
At issue is a simple invitation to related to my high school, that appeared within the ad stream:
Look up high school profiles from the Class of 1987 now. Reconnect with old friends from the Class of 1987 today.
Apparently, the ad server pulls information from my profile with regards to my birth date, but somehow ignores the actual graduation year listed in my Education section.
Yes, I am picking nits, but if you (as Facebook or as an advertiser therein) are trying to feign a personal touch, then get it right.
Relevance is the missing link to the next age of the internet, because automated relevance that works takes social networks away from being an appliance that you actively engage, and into a passive extension of your intelligence. No, this isn’t Neo wiring into the Matrix, but it’s the serving of the information that you wanted before you knew it existed to want.
There are others exploring this space. Facebook has the most eyeballs attuned to the News Feed experiment, where the most popular and clicked items in your feed bubble to the top. As Peter Shankman likes to say, however, it ought to be populated with the people I am most connected to now, not with people who are popular but irrelevant to me today. (I would venture to guess that Peter is less than happy with the results he sees.)
AideRSS tries to attack relevance through PostRank, and algorithm that grades and pulls the very best of a feed. But that is only the best as rated by others, not by your tastes and discrimination.
Google Reader recently added a setting to Sort by Magic, which takes into account new items from the feeds you click on the most, or click on earlier in browsing sessions.
There’s a lot to consider in getting it right, and a number of approaches to the recipe. As there should be, because whoever plants that flag first stands a great chance of locking down the market for several years (or getting bought out handsomely by deeper pockets.)
But I won’t believe there are enough people working on it until I see invitations to connect with classmates who graduated with me in 1986.
Building a Dynasty
Oct 8th
“Do as I say, not as I do.”
Culturally-speaking, that’s often seen as a statement of weakness – uttered by one who lacks the willpower to stick by their own rules. However, we tend to take that concept further than we should. And it has to do with our forgetting the difference between practitioners, teachers and coaches.
Practitioners get things done. They perform the actual tasks. They play the game from whistle to whistle, they run the track. And while practitioners can eventually become teachers or coaches, there’s no guarantee they have the skills to succeed.
Teachers exhibit a level of mastery, and their job is to bring their students to the bar. Whatever that bar of expectation is, the teacher must bring the student along. To do so, the teacher must demonstrate the same level of ability in performing the task. A math teacher can’t teach you the quadratic equation without showing you how it’s done on the board.
Coaches are a little different, because no one expects the coach to run every lap faster than the student. It’s the coach’s job to help practitioners figure out how they can improve, and set them on a path for that. Often, that requires a level of mastery in the theory of an activity, even if there is no longer the physical ability to carry it out.
Why do I highlight these distinctions? Because the failure to understand them is resulting in a lot of ill will in the communication arts.
When everyone is an expert.
I’m flabbergasted at the number of people who sell themselves as “Social Media Experts” or “Gurus” or whatever the title du jour is.
Being free to start and easy to learn, one of the selling points of these revolutionary tools is that “anyone can do it.” But how many can do it well?
- The ability to dribble a basketball doesn’t make you Michael Jordan.
- The ability to recite Dennis Hopper’s “run the ole Picket Fence at ‘em” speech from Hoosiers doesn’t make you a basketball coach.
- Neither does it make you Dennis Hopper.
- The ability to be a goalie in soccer won’t help you be a goalie in hockey, much less a forward.
We’ve got a lot of people who have proven they can do one thing, and they are hanging up a shingle to sell you on something else.
Choosing the right path.
Now, if you’re a business looking to get involved in a new endeavor, you have some options:
- Hire a big name and let them carry you to the top.
- Hire someone cheap, and hope for the best.
- Hire no one, and let best practices bubble up from your own people.
- Hire a coach who can bring the best out of your people.
Notice that I am not talking about Social Media here. This goes for anything, but let’s see how it applies.
Go hire that big name (like a Robert Scoble) and that person will bring you an instant audience and instant credibility. But when that person leaves, who owns the knowledge? Who owns the relationships? Who owns the accounts? Who is ready to step up and fill the shoes?
Go hire that affordable alternative. Why not? In the grand scheme of things, you can write it all off as a pilot project.
Don’t hire anyone. (Be prepared for very mixed results, and a very nervous legal team.)
Go get a coach, who has a proven ability to elevate your game. Build bench strength. Build for the future, by injecting the change comfortably into the culture. Granted, there are very few of these coaches around. Within Social Media, there are many people who are great at what they do, but it might have little to do with coaching ability and everything to do with their own knowledge of the industry they are augmenting.
Past performance is no proof of future success.
Here’s the dirty secret: there are several reasons why social media practitioners do well. Some are just born with the right attitude for personal and conversational communication. If they have that knack, you can take someone with a few years experience in your company and they might shine. But take them out of your company, and they will be hopelessly lost (like the guy who won every golf tournament, until he got on a real course and couldn’t find the Clown’s Mouth.)
That is the Practitioner - very skilled, but not necessarily versatile enough to change games.
Some have the ability to show you what they do and how they do it, and you are able to follow the steps and emulate their success. This can be a good thing, but it also deceives. The guy who shows you how to get 80,000 Twitter followers might not have a clue what to do with them. His strength is solely in acquisition, not in leveraging or in calls-to-action.
That is the Teacher - who can instruct you on how to do what they’ve already done.
How to spot those who can really help you:
- They have proven their skills in different kinds of businesses and business models.
- They don’t have immediate answers, but instead follow with more detailed and insightful questions.
- They create ideas, concepts and systems that no one has ever seen – because your challenge is unique.
That’s how you know you’ve found a Coach. The person who will push you to heights you couldn’t have reached alone, and will leave you better than she found you. The person who will draw indirectly from past experiences and directly from sound principles to craft solutions to your problems. The individual who can fade into the background after launch, confident those he trained are self-sustaining and know how to improve on their own.
You know when you’ve found a coach, when you hear his students calling their own shots.
Phoxes in your Phonebill?
Jan 21st
Remember that old adage about foxes and henhouses? A company in New Jersey appears poised to become the guardian of fraud for low-income Alabamians, for the low price of $180 a year.
Consumer Data Service has received approval from the Alabama Public Service Commission to perform “third-party billing” for various businesses and properties. Specifically for the following business websites:
- http://myvoicemaildirect.com/ (petition pdf)
- http://evoiceconnect.com/ (petition pdf)
- http://idprotectionplus.com/ (petition pdf)
- http://myidsafeguard.com/ (petition pdf)
- http://fraudwatchguard.com/ (petition pdf)
- http://fraudalertguard.com/ (petition pdf)
The first two appear to be voicemail/communication consolidation services. Â VERY overpriced for what they claim to do. The other four are all identity-theft protection subscriptions. 15-bucks a month? What the hell?
Notice the slick websites, that all hawk the same services and promises, but targeted to different demographics (father-led household, mother-prominent household, single female, single male.) Also note that 15-bucks a freakin’ month is way too much. Would it surprise me to find out that all are shell companies for the same ownership as CDS?
Now, look at the website for Consumer Data Service:
“Online merchants will be able to increase their customer demographics by providing our billing services to consumers that don’t have, can’t have, or don’t use credit cards. This method allows merchants to optimize their revenue through consumer expansion.”
In other words, they make a business out of targeting the phone bills of people who would have a hard time getting credit cards.
Identity theft is a huge and growing problem, but is $180/year a good wager? And will the people having this “easy service” pushed on them going to have the wherewithal to calculate that risk?


