« December 2008 | Main | February 2009 »
This curious article wound me up because of the way it choose to define masculinity - we're after boundaries, sanctions and identity are we? And the suggestion that religion is particularly good at doing this.
I would have thought that women can shape male identity along these lines very well. How about
If you don't stop slouching on
the sofa drinking beer in your underwear then I'm going to
turn the TV off!
I don't see religion doing any better than that :-)
contributed by my sister this time also a giant in matters concerning national health. Must be Friday!
This memorable phrase is from a book by Guy Kawasaki - and it is advice to startups. But I reckon its very relevant advice for recesionary times.
Eat like a bird - cut out all unnecessary purchases and hirings, get by using your existing inventory and sweat your assets - try to get even more out of them. You'll get a better return from what you already have than trying to assimilate something new and make payback on it straight away.
Poop like an elephant - dump anything and everything you don't need - the leaner your enterprise is the more flexible it can be. Don't allow yourself to get distracted. Focus on priorities. Recessions are like a suppositories - they clean out the system. Without recessions you get rotting firms that won't quite fall over. That's why government have to be oh so careful who they bail out - otherwise you postpone the inevitable you don't save the company.
This does not mean spend nothing. Birds need to be light to fly - they actually eat their close to their own bodyweight every day. Nor does it mean get rid of everything - you need reserves to get you through the hard times. This isn't a good time to be anorexic or bulemic. But battening down the hatches is a way of blocking the possibility of change - mutate, process, reshape. Poop like a bird and poop like a you know who!
A bit of sick satire from newsbiscuit which my brother - a pharmaceutical researcher of immense experience thought it was as hilarious (as I did) - so forwarded it to me. There is some irony in trying to stop people travelling to Switzerland to kill themselves when our own superbugs are barely under control and most of us would like to stay out of hospital if we can possible avoid it - even when we're sick just in case we catch something much worse while we're there. Point well made.
Raluca Anchidin of Starcom Bucharest put me onto this blog about qualitative research. There's a great posting about the Apple 1984 ad which was researched recently with an animatic - and bombed. Though I don't think the film quite delivers the point the makers were trying to make - we don't research ideas to find out whether respondents like them but whether they understand them and make a brand connection.
A wonderful silly piece I discovered on Linked ins Next Gen Market Research forum. Some academic has been researching the passenger list of the Titanic and found that more US passengers survived. Apparently the Brits did the decent thing and got into queues. While all the other nationalities with the Yanks leading the charge - raced for the boats leaving the Brits to their fate. I'm fascinated that anyone would get paid for doing this kind of analysis - but it is interesting to consider what inputs they would need to validate the story - they can't just use passenger lists surely. You would need to have anecdotal evidence that people were being shoved out of the way. At least it shows that the British are the last bastion of civilization - pardon me were you aware there was a queue for this lifeboat?
I'm really not calling for a ministry of commercial propaganda. But I can't help being disturbed when Thinkbox trumpets that TV adwatching is increasing faster than the amount of TV we're watching. Apparently in the UK we each watched 42 ads a day last year.
Now there's politics aplenty going on here. We are expecting digital spending to overtake TV spend by the end of 2009 - so a press release reminding us that TV by what ever delivery channel is still everybody's favourite is a little like Custer's last stand.
But in an economic climate whose uncertainty has largely come about because the bursting of a financial bubble am I alone in worrying that advertising media are in the process of creating another one. Attention is already a commodity in very short supply - so shouldn't there be more focus on less advertising which is more involving? If I find these mindboggling statistics hard to believe - it isn't because I worry that the figures are bogus but am concerned that advertisers are getting less and less value for money - what levels of recall can an advertiser expect? Not as high as last year or the year before.
Social media is still trendy and on the way to paying for itself but its great merit lies in people choosing what interests them. I think the word engagement should be banned from use in connection with advertising. I get engaged in those things that I choose to watch - not when I am a captive viewer. Trying to increase the volume of TV watched and the volume of advertising - is like trying to grow spam. Its pissing in the pool - spoiling it for everyone else.
Simon Andrews of Mindshare blogged about it here.
When a retailer discounts they steal from their suppliers. What difference would it make if price promotions became associated with theft?
I know there's such a thing as markdowns. But margin contribution is much more common. So let's call it theft. And let the customers decide.
