It seems that the pundits in social media / web land are always upbeat about the latest gadget, the new social network, a new Google products, etc. Talking about serious issues thus takes a back seat given that apathetic societies don’t tend to thirst for more serious discussions on the future of our world and the internet.

The latest case is in point is a push to re-draw what is deemed “acceptable use” for congressmen and women (as discussed here) which will inevitably lead to closure on politicians being able to speak directly to their constituents via the net. Isn’t that the point of the net? To get shit done and communicate? Possibly to be entertained if you are addicted to the naughty side of life. (See: Christy Brinkley’s ex.)

Clearly I can’t fault mainstream marketing / advertising pundits fully since many use social media to make more money, more connections, and followers. Others are tied to corporations that neither allow freedom of choice or speech as it relates to what can be expressed during work and off hours. Even simply having an opinion could result in job loss.

I suppose my griping is rather useless here but I am frankly getting worried by the visceral disconnect that is the work / life balance. Middle class zombies walk our streets while men in suits rule it. While I’ve always seen the upside of being elitist and hope to some day climb my way up, I never quite understood until recently that elitism in itself is a strategic move that allows distance to be kept between average citizens and ruling classes. My work is my life and my life is my work. It is this harmony that maintains my passion for business, politics, life, and the world. The workaday world is an excuse to live for the weekends.

Frankly, the hype and craze of web 2.0 is over for me. It’s clear that gang mentality won (See: Obama) and the net will be used just as with the megaphone of yore: the loudest voices will win. So until “average folks” sit back and take in the potential power of all of our toys the mediums will remain moot. Thoughts and ideas are flushed down the tubes just like old newspapers get recycled.

I’m certainly not an advocate for activism. In fact much of it is rather loosely strung together on the web but worth mentioning is the recent FISA bill that Obama voted for. The technology used to power My.BarackObama.com was used against him by the people to fight against his controversial vote. So what’s the next step? Methinks those types of outlets won’t be as available to supporters in the future or will be heavily moderated to avoid such conflicts of political interest. Then we’re back to square one: a corporate “vote for me” pitch that is top down as politics usually goes.

The long and short of this disjointed rant is that we all know where this is going: back to square one where our internet packages will look like satellite or mobile rate plans. On deck. But by then it will be too late to maintain pipe neutrality. Sadly.

I thought it peculiar when people started using the term “the internets”–plural. Now it makes sense. But guess where 99% of the mainstream population will be? On the controlled platform. I feel for the kids of tomorrow who will never get to experience neutrality and freedom online. Likewise, I’m glad I saw it because it inspired me to control my destiny, start a company, and work my way up. People need hope to take risk and make change.

It seems that given fears about the economy and war that the message of hope is finally here but words aren’t making as much of a difference as they used to. Remember when words mattered?

Filed under: Rants, Social Media, Personal Branding, The Future, Wealth, Leadership

Be First To Comment

Slightly overcast in Montreal today on the heels of the official kick off to summer. They call it Formula 1 racing and it’s the biggest party of the year some would say. Unfortunate to say, however, that thunderstorms are expected to hit during the festivities. Montreal is a classy lady when she wants to be but don’t expect to see that side of her this weekend.

As I’ve been noticeably absent of late on this blog (save for my Twitter feed) and with respect to engagement within social media circles I’ve become more focussed on my company Fixion Media. It’s easy to get lost in YouTube. On TED. In Google Reader. Facebook. Definitely Twitter. And of course old media streams. Well you get the picture. But frankly to me it’s time to flush the fishbowl and start anew.

Given that media, agencies, and marketers are pretty well connected in the digital realm I’m seeing little progress in companies actually working together in a social manner that is compatible to how we speak to each other in the corporate / private world via social mediums. In business terms the contracts read the same. The due dilligence is there (and the wallets are light “due to the credit crunch”). The risk to a given brand seems to great to bear should an experiment go wrong.

I believe in a general sense this to be a turning point in my philosophical outlook on the web and business. The internet mirrors its real-world corporate counterpart in real ways where profit and glory rule the day. I of course have no problem with profit nor glory but I’ve come to appreciate and better understand the needs of real people. Normal people who can’t afford iPhones with unlimited data plans. People that think $50 is too much to pay for a concert ticket. Musicians that think they’re famous but are actually dead broke. And most importantly perhaps I’ve come to better understand where my company fits into the bigger picture in terms of serving such communities and likewise protecting their interests from sharks. It’s a fascinating dynamic which has ruled my thoughts of late.

“Always remember the art of good business is being a good middleman.” That quote is from Layer Cake, a film. While I’ve changed my personal definition over the years of what being a “good middleman” entails I’ve come full circle to boil it down to its simplest state again. Such a state in my opinion requires independence. Right now, that is justification enough to pull away from the day to day drama of social circles and into the real world of business. Striking a good balance between the two will prove necessary to the success of my companies.

Filed under: Rants, Economy, Social Media, Personal Branding, Politics, The Future, Music Industry, Wealth, Leadership

Be First To Comment

Chris Brogran and Christopher S. Penn offer their takes here and here respectively as to why PodCamp Boston 3 is charging $50 this year per attendee. While that is certainly far more reasonable than paying $1895 for the Canadian Marketing Association’s annual convention and trade show, I think that the gateway fee will be of hinderance to the younger generation.

Conferences as we know are networking vehicles. But let’s for a second accept that we are really attending to learn about new industry trends so that we can make our corporations more profitable. *cough* Shmooze. *cough* Steak and drinks on the expense accounts. *cough*

Where was I?

I find PodCamp’s to be far more populist in nature where networking is certainly of value but it seems to me that people are more jazzed about being self-empowered, they’re jazzed about the technology, and they want to be cutting edge leaders whereas let’s face it; corporate conferences are for wheeling and dealing.

This brings me to David Armano’s “We Are All ‘Internet Dating’” post from yesterday. It’s a bit creepy to me and possibly the reason why I neglect to attend most ad-hoc gatherings. This may very well be the Achilles’ heel to my survival in marketing / social media but I am comfortable in taking the risk.

As a young go-getter, I grew up on the net thanks to a parent with an old school laptop and 14.4 modem connection. The 90s were lovely. Remember then ya’ll? Newsgroups (ie the original RSS)… IRC channels (yeah, we actually used to chat back then instead of throwing text darts via Twitter)… community-driven message boards (as opposed to personal blogs). The point is that I shook all of my “sociality” back then in order to glue myself to CNN for 12-hours per day to learn about stock markets, the internet boom, and other matters of the free market. This filtered view of the global trends, cash, and movers and shakers enthralled me.

I’ll tell you something you already know: the free market isn’t anything like social media/new media. And most the fun we all have on Facebook and Twitter and GoBoDoWee–future “hit” social network I’m sure–is mainly to be connected to the world on a philosophical level. We all know who our real friends are. We also know who we respect most within the context of business. And most importantly we all know how to separate business and pleasure. (Or do we now?)

My arching point coming back to the formerly-free / now $50 PodCamp unconference experience versus the $1895 corporate conference model is that I don’t particularly care for either model. One now has a cost, the other is too costly. Neither have comfortable chairs. Conferences are about who you know (or who you want to get to know) and to that there is a cost to pay. The X factor is star power where silly folks like me actually ponder dropping two grand on seeing almighty headliners like Seth Godin and Avinash Kaushik. Meanwhile, while surely worth the expense, I would think it more difficult to convince the average PodCamp / podcasting fan to attend with such a fee because it becomes a business transaction rather than a free-spirited community event (such with IRC and message boards of yore).

I hope I’m wrong. But I can’t yet find the logic in wanting to pay $1895 when I could be paying $50 for what could be a more beneficial experience. At the end of the day and money aside, I want to be in the company of leaders and policy makers. I’ve leveraged social media in order to learn from such leaders and I hope to repay it in kind by helping others along my path.

Just like one social network might be similar to another, all conferences have similar aims whether it be advancement of a cause, activism, networking, or otherwise. But are Geek Dinners worth attending? Are unconferences worth it? Who cares. Just attend a couple and you’ll find out. (And yes they are worth it BTW). My point is that if unconference organizers aren’t careful, they risk falling into the free market trap of needing bigger speakers and even bigger sponsors to bridge the gap. It’s going to happen: and this $50 fee for PodCamp Boston is just the seed. Once the free market comes into the picture it will become more difficult to control the fate of the movement that is still admittedly nascent. I suppose this worries me more than any cost of admission in itself.

Filed under: Social Media, Personal Branding, Politics, The Future, Branding, Leadership, PodCamp

2 Comments

I was inspired by Obama and Ron Paul. Grandfather Howard Dean and Joe Trippi must also be proud of my accomplishments.

Early this morning we (that being Fixion Media) launched a pilot program at Blabbermouth.net enabling independent artists and record labels to share in the cost of advertising. Much like Google ads, except branded and far more relevant, our shared Indie banner template shatters the barrier of entry for clients of all sizes.

Here’s an example campaign from the original story posted by Blabbermouth.net:

Double Banner Features:

• Shared banner (2 ad spots available per banner)
• More than 50% discount compared to “non-Indie” banner campaign
• Top-of-page “Leaderboard” placement alongside other premium advertisers
• Your ad rotates within a BLABBERMOUTH.NET-branded double banner frame
• Ad Specs: 350px x 70px - GIF, JPG, or Flash - Max 50KB File Size
• Click here to view a demo of the Double Banner.

Campaigns ranged from $75 to $150 USD.

The long and short of this story is that it was our goal to sell 10 campaigns in 48 hours. It’s a quick blitz; a cash infusion that is certainly scalable. Less than 24 hours in and we’ve closed 7 deals. This being a new campaign offering for Fixion Media at Blabbermouth.net, interest may be yet to peak. We don’t know yet. The important part is that we will likely meet our target by this evening.

But the experiment in itself was to test the “top down” versus “bottom up” donation strategy used frequently by politicians these days. Rather than sell our inventory to the higest bidder–which in remnant terms is nothing short of an insulting figure–we have looked to the community that is loyal and familiar with Blabbermouth.net. Visitors include all types of music fans and a significant porition of the rock/metal industry that find value in the site’s content and reach. In this case we wanted to know how much support we could count on only from the grassroots. The “top down” strategy in our case would have been to max out our leads, max our existing client buys, and seek new clients externally. The “bottom up” strategy allowed us to listen to the community and listen we did.

Publicly the comments on Blabbermouth.net’s message board have been very insightful. Mind you, it didn’t help that it’s April 1st. Some called this out as a joke but in any event it helped generate some added buzz on the side.

The most important part of this experiment: we now have 7 great new clients and hopefully more will decide to be more aggressive in the digital marketing space–especially first timers.

The real trick to keeping this momentum going a la Barack Obama is to keep POW-ing our client base (a la Andy Nulman). We have to keep innovating and building new products to further complement the needs of Indie advertisers. Soon enough you won’t be seeing Classmates.com ads or Google Ads anymore. And that’s music to my ears.

Filed under: Fixion Clients, Case Studies, Publisher Side, Vertical Ad Networks, The Future, Music Industry, Leadership

Be First To Comment

| View | Upload your own

Hat tip to The Customer Collective.

Filed under: Rants, The Future, Leadership

Be First To Comment

…according to a recent study conducted by Ipsos:

“There is a positive and a negative spin regarding the marquee media brands. On one hand we clearly see their superior performance as sources of authoritative, trusted, influential information – linked to their similarly strong profile as providers of insight. On the other hand, one could argue that their strengths in these other areas have not paid off in terms of delivering superior insight.”

Insight, otherwise known as “connecting the dots”, is an essential skill in the business world. Without layering as much info as possible, it becomes impossible to create valuable insight.

Filed under: Case Studies, Branding, Leadership

Be First To Comment

What happens when I find myself with 5 minutes to burn on a Sunday? This week I started a Facebook group called “Twitter Petition For International Users” which has the following description:

This Facebook group is a lazy effort to bring equality to global Twitter users that cannot at present take advantage and enjoy the same powerful uses of that of U.S. users given the SMS cap of 250 received messages per week. Viewing messages on the web or RSS, albeit useful, is not what Twitter is all about.

Considering that Twitter has been useful for me in a business capacity I thought this to be a useful cause for thousands of other users.

NB. I have not yet consumed any Saint Patties day drinks. This is a lucid experience.

Filed under: Politics, The Future, Twitter, Leadership

Be First To Comment

Mitch Joel’s blog posting titled, “Marketers - I Believe The Children Are Not Our Future”, tackles a tangible issue facing marketing companies at the moment. While I agree with Mitch’s stance on the whole, I likewise must default to the theory that educational institutions shouldn’t cater wholly to the needs of corporations. Rather, the government should generally guide and fund educational programs that cater to new and/or emerging markets without influence. Otherwise, the learning process is tilted off its axis and becomes a forum to learn “answers to the test”–in this case the skills needed for a particular job function–rather than instilling knowledge and passion into vibrant young minds.

There is another layer to this problem and it is the institutional reliance on the almighty resume. I would bet that there are thousands of teenagers pulling computers apart in their basements and building ad-hoc networks. School might not be for them. There are also thousands more editing their own YouTube videos, designing Flash applications, or creating powerful social networking groups. Yet school mightn’t be for them either. Such types of independently-minded workers are all around us–they might simply lack the proper “corporate environment” at present to thrive. This is especially important in that money as a motivating force is less important now than ever. I have excluded people that operate small businesses for the sake of making a point here, but it’s important to note that such workers couldn’t possibly be in contention for such job openings because they perhaps value freedom, time, and creativity more than the average person. This makes them too costly to employ for the average corporation. But I digress.

Building a successful company involves growing its revenues, getting more focussed, hiring staff members in cycles, and aggrandizing the overall apparatus of a given company. The irony is that Web 2.0 and social media are areas in opposition to concepts like “corporation-building”, which involves skilful layering of executives, staff members, investors, and clients required to achieve success. In the new economy, more people are clearly interested in making their personal brands matter within specific corporate climates, which for obvious reasons is often a conflicting ideal vis-a-vis that of corporate prerogative.

At the end of the day, there are only a handful of “types” of people out there: leaders, workers, those in between, those on the outside, and the “owners” who serve to manage the leaders. Since more people want to be leaders or owners than ever before, it’s fairly clear to me that’s it’s going to take far more than pinpoint precision educational programs and goofy 2.0 office settings. We’re in this for the long-haul and corporations need to take responsibility to breed, train, and provide the opportunity for upward mobility based on meritocratic policies.

Perhaps the brand of the future will consist of dozens or hundreds of companies intertwined in a progressive new form of organization of equals. Equality is a rare concept in the business world though. That’s a lot of egos to check at the door.

Filed under: Rants, Economy, Social Media, Politics, The Future, Leadership, HR

Be First To Comment

| View | Upload your own

Hat tip to David Armano for Twittering about it.

Filed under: Personal Branding, The Future, Wealth, Leadership

Be First To Comment