Granted, part of the joy in the film – which is divided into twelve parts on the site – is seeing the interaction with people and places in the real world of New York City, but its been a very long time since I have seen a dance film this good online or on the big screen.  Usually, there are so many cameras that you lose the dance entirely.  Or, there’s not enough movement – leaving the viewer to feel as if they are an outsider and not part of it. One of my favorite chapters is, #3 “It Goes Like This,” where the lead teaches random people the dance and they all perform back-up for her.

Some other points of interest were:
- When there was an entire dance party on the subway and you can clearly see who is part of the cast and who was not by the mere fact that those who were not all had the mobile phones out to capture video – then riders entering the train at a stop were treated to a male pole dancer in the doorway.
- When they seized the opportunity to visit the Occupy rally at Zuccotti Park during the ”Shopping Spree” section to get nice footage and convey the societal ends of the spectrum.
 
- When theprotagonist – who often comes across as an Audrey Hepburn/Holly Golightly for this millenium –  gets kicked out of Yankee Stadium for standing on the outfield wall (timed perfectly with the lyrics, of course.)

I have listened to the ALL DAY piece since downloading it last March and had not even thought to overlay a narrative.  Director and Cinematographer, Jacob Krupnick, and his cast were able to weave an eloquent and even moving story into  the narrative Krupnik derived from the music. So, the introduction of that emotionality beyond the music is what blew me away.  Additionally, the potagonist, Anne Marsen, seems to be a force in dance and perhaps even more (see the Audrey Hepburn note above.)  Her improvisational style is refreshing and intense with expressions of full emotion.

To me, this provides a strong sense of what’s possible in digital - either as a creative outlet or a marketing element. The filmmaker and cast’s path to making this real is chronicled briefly in a NY Times Magazine piece by Bill Trough a year ago after they had only created a proof of concept. Their original goal was to post on kickstarter.com and raise $5,000.  They ultimately raised $25,000 and shot from April through October of 2011.  With a range of cast members, volunteers and ”innocent” bystanders throughout Manhattan, the piece goes beyond being a love letter to the city.

In the past, something like this would have been hard to pull off – let alone distribute.  They are currently on a tour of social events and screenings that hits Los Angeles tomorrow night at Space 1520 in Hollywood on Cahuenga and it has been accepted to the SXSW Film Festival. My hope is that they are able to release it as a DVD, EST or whatever as one long piece, though I imagine there may be a considerable amount of legal restraints to doing so.

The Filmmaker and promoters have been able to generate coverage across the board. They have moved off of the internet and into the real world with inclusion into festivals and tour events and the hope is that the movement will continue. To think that it all basically started with experimentation and passion enabled by technology, the future possibilities are quite exciting. Hopefully, this will open more doors for this form of entertainment, trigger ideas for others and extend the power of Content across the digital realm.

The one thing that is certain is that people will always find fault in anything the President does – even if he were to single-handedly save a dozen children from a flood…and save their puppies too. So, to try to control everything would be a maddening (if not stupid) directive. The hope is that the positive sentiment outweighs the negative and you do the best you can to do the right thing.

Even when he is doing the right thing, and the action seems so innocent and harmless – perhaps, even charming – there can be reasons to shudder.  One of those moments came the other night.  It could be that it leads to nothing, but I doubt it. The President and First Lady hosted a celebration of Blues music in the White House – much like many, many presidents have hosted musical events in the past.  When Buddy Guy, B.B. King and the other musicians prodded the president on to sing along, the President initially declined.  After a few more moments of pleading, he demurred and joined in the singing of “Sweet Home Chicago.”  Seems nice enough, huh? When I heard him singing that, I cringed.  I didn’t cringe because of his singing skills, but the part in the song that he finally came in on – “Come On, Baby don’t you want to go?”

I immediately envisioned the Republican Party playing on that to their heart’s delight. That’s where everything is more of a challenge for the President’s communications managers than it is for any other, because everything can be twisted and presented out of context – and it will.

Certainly, politics has a different set of theatrics around it that corporate culture, but the onslaught of information is still quite there and needing some form of management.  There are lessons businesses can take from the Office of the President (any President of any party) and suffuse into their own communications procedures.  And, those communications directors can be thankful that they don’t have the level of stress that running communications for POTUS brings – especially if you don’t want him to return to Sweet Home Chicago for at least another four years…

Flurry’s VP of Marketing, Peter Farago stated in the company’s blog post that they “believe the main reason for this disparity (in Mobile) is that the mobile app platform has emerged so rapidly over such a short period of time. …Madison Avenue and brands have yet to adjust to an unprecedented adoption of apps by consumers.” That may be part of the issue, but it misses a number of other key factors:

• The way in which people interact with the different media platforms is as much a piece of the puzzle as the time they spend using them. We all know that viewers expect a certain form of advertising when they are engaging with TV, Print and even Radio.  When looking at the Web, it seems that there is still not yet full stability in advertising engagements and Mobile is considered to most media planners to still be the Wild West.
• With the above, some media platforms have standards that are easy to understand and convey to both upper management and clients.
• While TV has gone through some changes with the advent of DVRs and the ability to skip ads, there is still structure there and the historical arguments come into play.  In the case of Radio and Print, the numbers are dwindling, but advertisers still have a clear idea of the context in which they will be viewed.  And most importantly, they know that there will be a decent opportunity for the ads to be seen or heard by those who are consuming those types of media. in all three of these, there is a higher percentage of ad spend than time spent.
• Ad spend on Web is closer to alignment of time spent (22%) to ad spend (16%) and that is likely due to time in the marketplace as well as normalization of not only contextual placements but reporting.  That will continue to evolve and shift (e.g. current trend from standard ads to video) and we will most likely see the spend percentages rise above the time percentages in the next year or two.
• Ultimately, the costs for these media placements are not normalized and cannot be compared as apples to apples. Therefore, the numbers may be “illogically” skewed for some time to come.

Taking the above into consideration, there is still a major consideration for Mobile.  When you figure that most use of mobile is done on Apps and mobile websites that do not offer Mobile-specific advertising options, there would definitely be a disparity in the numbers.  Additionally, as mobile advertising is still relatively new, the media program costs are often heavily discounted to either get in the advertiser’s door or provide proof of concept.  With those offerings, there needs to be strong analytical follow-up to derive stronger (and more costly) programs.  As of now, we’re still too early to be able to do that – even if there was enough real advertising inventory to relate directly to the time spent meter.

The report did point to other interesting facts that could lead to a strong future in mobile media with the strongest one being that Upper Middle Class consumers aged 25 – 34 are the most likely to interact with mobile ads.

There is definitely a future in mobile advertising and the chasm between time spent and ad dollars spent will surely come more closely aligned. The smart bet is on more than just the numbers, but the context. The strongest contextual applications will play out in the coming years and the best option is to be ready to pounce when it arrives to generate the best return on any Mobile media spend investment.

Looking at the fact that Google has already logged over 200,000 miles of robotic driving in California with no legal standing to do so and the fact that these cars are a number of years away from hitting the markets, the new Nevada license plates are effectively just another step in the elevating excitement about the possibilities.  With other States in line to enact laws and license allowing robotic cars, those too will keep the buzz going and storylines prevalent until the car is complete and in the market – then we get to see what it’s really all about.

I have certainly been dreaming about cars that drive themselves since seeing them in saturday morning kids shows in the 70s.  It has always been about the joy of just keying in where I want to go and then getting there as if I had my very own chauffeur.

Seeing now that Google is far along in development, it got me thinking about what the possibilities are – based on the fact that a company so steeped in advertising is leading the charge in developing these cars.

We are already seeing the continued seepage of computers and applications into our car interfaces.  With those, the opportunities to skip radio advertising altogether or interact with advertising in a different altogether has become the norm.  I’m sure there would be more advertising delivered to us through our car applications if the government was not so worried about our paying attention to the road…  If we no longer had to pay attention to the road, can you imagine what the ramifications would be?

As quickly as we could key in our destination, the car’s computer could load up all of the route-relevant advertising.  Rather than making a last second decision to swerve across two lanes to go into a parking lot because you just thought of buying something there, “drivers” could be warned a couple of minutes ahead that there might be something of interest they want to stop at.  Users could even set it to always know where the closest clean bathroom is – just in case their newly-potty-trained child suddenly has to go.

With hands free, “drivers” would have noting to do, so of course they will be demanding advertising to be shown on screens throughout the vehicle (since they can now look anywhere.) Perhaps creating the new technology of cars driving themselves is really more about the software than the hardware?  Perhaps its Google’s version of my kid’s Leap Pad that requires you to only buy products from them at inflated prices. If Google created the media platform – a truly new mobile platform – and demanded that all advertising go through them, wouldn’t that create a form of financial euphoria for them?

Actually, I hope the above paragraph is not the case.  The closest I have come to that experience is sitting in a cab in New York or Las Vegas and seeing those annoying videos and I don’t care to have that same experience in my own car – even if it is driving me. But, there’s something to be said for being smart about smart advertising.

Nevada and all other states that create special licensing for robots are absolutely not complicit in creating a new media platform. But, Google’s play in this is an interesting look into the future – beyond just a car that drives itself.

I don’t know when it will come, but I still look forward to getting in my car and playing with all the available gadgets as I get from point A to point B. I just hope its not solely about Google creating a truly mobile advertising platform.

As municipalities are taking measures around the world to curb the proliferation in advertising and the cacophony of imagery and messaging that comes with that, these executions could be quite steep. The happiness in São Paulo, Brazil continues to spread since they passed a law cracking down on visual polution  and, while the citizens had something to complain about before the crackdown,  their ad placements weren’t even close to the brazen disregard for visual decorum that this product provides.

The folks at Brainiacs From Mars are smart, though, in how they may be able to control the prices they have to pay for placement.  For instance, they will most likely only be agreeing to paint homes that are on well trafficked roads.  Those houses are typically cheaper than the houses that have little to no traffic or are well covered by a wall or flora.  While it might be enticing for a homeowner with a 3 or 4K+ monthly mortgage to have a few month’s of paid support, their homes will most likely will not be in play. The houses that are selected for participation will naturally have considerably lower costs and higher visibility. Brainiacs founder, Romeo Mendoza, hopes to paint up to 1,000 homes.  We’ll have to see if their realized numbers come close and how the mix nets out.

Those painted houses will attract a lot of attention – good and bad – and will most-likely cause a stir and even further regulation and community guidelines.  Even with the crazy nature of this one, I place it behind the rooftop QR codes I wrote about a couple months ago in the “What are they thinking?” category because of its real visibility.

John Cougar Mellencamp caused excitement when he offered to paint MTV’s Party House pink in 1984 for some lucky winner. Sadly, I don’t think this is going to have that same type of excitement.  Surely, there could be some buzz if someone actually agrees to paint their house with a brand, but the brand should think long and hard whether they want to be a part of it. The portrayed brands will definitely be at the forefront of people’s thoughts. It seems unlikely that those thoughts will be kind. As for me, I’ll be happy to have a house branded in my neighborhood – when I’m living on Mars.

A story that made the rounds in the second half of last year was about Joe Fernandez and his issues with Delta Airlines.  He had gotten bumped from an overbooked flight on Delta and was given a voucher for future travel.  When he tried to redeem the voucher, he got nowhere with the agents – with some stating they had no idea what it was – and, upon emailing them, was ultimately told that he was out of luck.

What Fernandez did next was Tweet that he would never fly Delta again because of it.  The story could be over if it was not for the fact that Fernandez is the CEO of Klout, a resource for measuring influence online. Due to Delta’s using a partner’s services that Klout actually provides data for, they responded instantly with a tweet back that effectively said, “Really sorry about that.  We didn’t realize you had so much Klout.” They then provided a number to contact and quickly fixed the issue.

While it was a great use of technology to help them monitor and manage social chatter, Delta failed in how they used the technology to provide customer service.  Again, the world is different and, just because you might help someone at any of many points in a conflict, doesn’t mean that all is erased.  In this case, Fernandez had already posted his negative sentiment out there and their solution only pointed to a bigger problem.  The fact that they insinuate that they are only helping because of the influence of the offended makes many decide not to use their services moving forward.  Instead of laying out standards for who they will and will not help, their customer service should help anyone who has had an issue with their product or service.

In this case, they very well may have changed their practices since this story came to light last year, but I’m still carrying a negative impression of their brand. They would have had to work extra hard to market that negative sentiment into a positive one.

Customer Service always has a component of risk management involved and everyone can probably not be treated equally – there probably just isn’t enough time, resources or money to do so.  So, if you determine that your company cannot deliver a high level of customer service to everyone, you should go back to the drawing board again to see what can be done.  If you still can’t come up with a solution and must rely on a hierarchy of services based on clout,  the use of data can be used in a stronger way that neither puts off those who have clout and those you don’t.

Regardless of what you think about the Delta case (Fernandez should have never had a problem in the first place), set a strategy to be able to best handle the available data holistically.  Unless you’re a Casino/Resort, you probably won’t have all of the data points in place to inform levels of action immediately. Data alone won’t hack it entirely because data is often presented in a vacuum.  In the Delta case, they had the customer’s information and should look for a solution that matches that information with the data they have available through other departments so that it is clear who is calling, no matter what mode of communication is chosen. Whether it is in providing a score to the agents so that they can follow the correct “script” or, even better, provide leeway for customer service agents to provide the best solution at the time.  I don’t think the best solution at any time is nothing.  With better use of existing data, “nothing” needs never be used.

In the current environment, it is becoming harder to manage sentiment as social platforms are growing.  Much the same way the adage of being nice and helpful is usually the best way, the return to good customer service practices is imperative and can save companies much more than money in the future.

From what seems to be their first Doodle from before the Beta logo – commemorating the Burning Man Festival in 1998 - to this month’s already reached 8 Doodles, there’s a marked difference in frequency.  When you would just see one occasionally, that was special.  They were buzzed about and liked, which seems to have brought new meaning to it.  I remember seeing a feature on CBS Sunday Morning about the decisions and secrecy surrounding when and what would be created by their “elite” team of Doodlers.  They proudly stated that it was their choice and they were beholden to no one. 

We could be assured of seeing something special for holidays and major events, then.  But now, you can take a look at the Google Doodle galleries and see the most random commemorations.  For instance, I was able to find that Ito Jakuchu shares my birthday – though I have no idea who he was.  Perhaps the Doodles are now looked at as an opportunity for education and the conveyance of fun art, but has that frequency negated its power?

I’ve recently been asking myself if its worthwhile to continue writing the blog every day.  At this point, I’m challenged by the fact that it has become a personal goal to complete at least a year of daily entries.  My concern is that it is becoming more about the quantity than the quality.  I would like to think that every one of these posts is worthwhile, but I’m sure some are better than others.  Even if they were all phenomenal and insightful entries, the fact that they come out every day would make them less special.  Wouldn’t it?

If you look at your personal email account and all the subscriptions, do the more frequent mailings get overlooked in favor of the less frequent ones?  Is there a sense of excitement or exclusivity when coming across Travelzoo’s Top 20 that you no longer feel about Daily Candy, Groupon or Thrillist?

While Google did a nice job with their Valentine’s Day card this year:

The frequency of Google Doodles has made them a little les compelling.  It certainly seems to diminish their stated aim –  ”The doodle selection process aims to celebrate interesting events and anniversaries that reflect Google’s personality and love of innovation.”  The very spirit of innovation is lost when there is so much repetition.

Frequency is important in all forms of messaging and communication.  Much like the parent telling their children to do something a million times, the effect was probably lost after the third time.  You can tell someone you love them 100 times and it probably has a lesser connotation than if you told them 10 times over the same period.  Of course, when considered in marketing, there is a fine line between too little and too much – especially as campaign flights get tightened with much more competition out there.  The reality is, that sometimes, too much can lead to diminishing returns.  Just as in relationships, no matter how much you want to profane your love, you can lose by having too much.

Perhaps it started with the syndicated airing of MONK episodes - a heavy character piece starring Tony Shalhoub – was one of their most-watched shows. They not only focused on the strong character theme in their marketing, but in their programming.  With a string of original shows featuring strong characters, starting with PSYCH in 2006, through to other shows that were light on drama and heavy on character (BURN NOTICE, IN PLAIN SITE, ROYAL PAINS, SUITS) - not only did the audience know what they would find, it was clear what the network executives were looking for in both original programming and syndication.  With the emphasis on character, it isn’t totally about programming fads or copycat programming.

That consistent, clear direction works throughout its marketing as well.  Wayne Friedman talked about network branding in his blog yesterday, focusing on the non-scientific polling of his wife.  When he asked what her favorite network is, she took a moment to scroll in her mind through all the programs from disparate networks, hemmed and hawed, and ultimately stated, “No, wait. It’s USA. It’s about the characters. The shows are fun and light.” Friedman was right that her response is derivative of the network’s content and tag line, but much more of it comes from their consistent messaging and experiences in their marketing extensions – and it goes even further than that…

Everything ties to character.  They have won awards for their digital extensions of the theme and keep pounding away at the character moniker throughout their messaging. So, that consistency alone should be enough, but they leverage the messaging to actually go above and beyond in ways that help their bottom line.

They extend the theme into non-profit and PSA territory in a way that’s organic and meaningful.  They have shown the spotlight on characters that make a difference through their Character Project – a series of short films – and in their PSAs under the Characters Unite campaign.

The PSA series has been USA’s campaign against prejudice and racism and promoting tolerance and acceptance.  An interesting point is that they are able to involve celebrities that are not even on their network for the cause, bringing in different viewers than usual.  One key example is the involvement of NFL players though the network has no NFL connection.  There is even a city-to-city tour going on right now that brings celebrities around to live events as part of a national storytelling tour.

In the end, they leverage every opportunity to prove that Characters are Welcome and key to their existence.  It helps across the board as everyone knows what they are getting then they either go to watch shows or sell them to the network.  It is certainly easier for a more pointed network to pull this off than a broadcast network that needs to be broad in its nature.  The same could be said for studios that have to have somewhat of a broad output of properties. What stands out is that USA not only defined a tag line, but a governing rule of thumb for their entire being.  The campaign has been going for 7 years and does not seem to have any signs of stopping.  You’d be hard pressed to find another example of that overall branding success for a network or studio. In doing so, USA overcame the inherent challenges in branding entertainment and even took it a further step beyond.

(Chris Chambers/Getty Images)

Dan LeBatard of the Miami Herald wrote a good piece dissecting some of the many elements make this story shocking.  Where basketball and scouting are so developed it is almost a science, how is it possible that this young guy was able to do what he has done under such circumstances? While it has only been a few games and he most likely will come back down to Earth at some point, most teams would be happy to have even half of his scoring production and natural leadership on their team. But, when you think about it, this could not have happened with just any team.  The fact that the Knicks were doing so poorly that they would take a chance on Lin added to the fact that they are in a major market, are key to this being as big of a story as it is.

The Miami Heat have a Rookie, Norris Cole, who shows signs of greatness at point guard, but the team has three healthy superstars, so his play can be limited and he can hopefully grow into something phenomenal. Jeremy Lin first played for his hometown Golden State Warriors and, though he received applause whenever he got on the court, nobody knew about him outside of the Bay area – the market was just too small to make a difference.

So, again, what does this have to do with marketing, staffing, innovation or business? There are a number of points to focus on:

• Stepping Up – Jeremy Lin obviously worked hard to even get to a place where he would have the possibility of playing.  In the game of sports, players have to be ready because their opportunity can come at any time.  While there are more politics in play in business, when that opportunity arises for us to step up, we’ve got to show our true mettle.  Lin walked through the door when it was opened and he made the best out of it. Some people choose not to walk through the door when it is opened.  The difference between those who do and those who don’t is remarkable.
• Staffing – We know there are stereotypes at play when it comes to hiring.  In the least, we’ve got to do what we can on an individual basis to move beyond that.  It is definitely hard when many recruiters are only looking for the sure thing, but there are many hidden gems that are missed because the algorithm didn’t pick them up in an HR application or the recruiter just didn’t have the knowledge base to get what was really needed.  It’s too bad that there’s not a hiring solution that mimics online dating services that have been so successful.  Regardless, those talent gems can come from anywhere and everywhere.
• Resourcefulness – Companies too often focus on what they can’t do because of size or vertical.  What really matters is being true to oneself and have the confidence to move forward in a way that fits within the parameters of the product or vision.  There are so many options for making a positive splash using the tools that are already available.
• Opportunity – By knowing what your business realities are and recognizing what can be done to optimize what you already maintain by way of product, staff, timing or location, you can best leverage any opportunity to do something extraordinary for your business.  Too often, companies look at their revenues flattening or shrinking and start battening down the hatches and wait for an economic upturn.  That doesn’t always seem to be the best choice.  It’s those down times that can lead to the biggest opportunities for the company – perhaps in ways you’ve never imagined.  Had the Knicks coach not taken a chance and put Lin in the game while then creating specific plays for the personnel he had on the court, we might not be buzzing about Linsanity.
• Innovation – Perhaps it’s not about real change, just innovated approaches to what you’ve been doing for years. Once you start repeating the known and stop looking for ways to improve – whether your business is doing well or poorly – it’s almost like your company is doomed.  In this model, Lin isn’t doing anything different from what a true point guard should be doing. But, by placing someone whom nobody thought would be more than a bench-warmer and his energy in the line-up, everybody’s game is raising up a notch and the crowds are loving it.
• Success Breeds Success – Sadly, I have seen clients and other companies feel that they have hit their goals and call it a year rather than harnessing that success to build other things.  The Linsanity is an example of success being harnessed to grow other things.  Because of his popularity, the Timberwolves had to sell out their standing room only tickets because of the demand when the Knicks played there this weekend.  The NBA is getting a push because of it and, certainly, the Knicks are working the angle.  The biggest mistake you can make is when you let a success remain in its own vacuum and not look to leverage it.

There’s going to be much more to learn from Linsanity and everything that surrounds it as time moves on.  Hopefully, he continues his success once the two superstars return to the team. And, hopefully whatever is learned by this helps companies flourish beyond what they thought was possible – through opening eyes up to what is not imminently seen.

With that being said, I couldn’t pass up on celebrating the changes in Darth Vader’s graphic interface that our friends at Oskoui+Oskoui created.  If Lucas can mess with the mythology, then why can’t everyone else?  Please select your interface, but know that a 2 year contract is required…

The Blackberry InterfaceWindows 7 Interface