 |
     |
|
|
I've been musing recently [not good . . . everyone clear the area] about marketing and advertising. Among those two people who read my blog and half care about the subject matter, the idea on paper (not the idea in conception, which I can not claim pure authorship over) will probably cause dissention, possibly distaste, maybe disgust, and almost certainly defensiveness. Every good religious debate does all those things -- and starts a round of name-calling to boot. That's OK: I can take it.
The idea I've woven into a 1,500-word essay entitled, A Lutheran view of advertising orthodoxy, is this: The advertising world, through its organization, priests and prophets, and its adherents has managed to create an interesting and largely dichotomous religion categorized by brand and direct advertising. They are the catholic and orthodox of the advertising world.
These two branches of the same overall theology have developed their own rituals and rites. And, like good variations on a theme, manage to depricate one another's beliefs on rather inconsequential differences all the while obligingly ignoring the absence of underlying reason for the persistence of such distinctions.
What I'm saying is, I think that advertising and marketing communications in general is due for a post-reformation (to carry on the religio-historic theme) restructuring. For any who remember, the Cluetrain Manifesto actually numbered many "theses" although I can't recall or not whether they were actually nailed to any doors. With a little bit of time between then and now, and some further changes to the context of the advertising model(s), it's probably good time for marketers (specifically advertisers) to reassess what they're doing.
Despite the comfort in continuing with what we know ("better the devil . . ."), there is ample evidence to suggest that (a) what we know isn't working all that well anymore, (b) there is no need for the dichotomy and distinction between Brand and Direct, and (c) at a competitive level, we better do something else before it's too late. I don't know exactly what that is, but I have taken a stab at it by suggesting it has an awful lot to do with "iterated communication," "interaction rhythm," "consumer engagement," "media-agnostic, multi-channel instant response technologies," and "undiscovered country."
I spent a whack of time re-writing the essay not to be pointedly aggressive to any one in particular, especially advertising people of either variation, so download the PDF and give it a read. (IOW: I'm not going to retype it here.) Get angry. Write me a nasty note. But if you do, please tell me why the status quo is so enviable.
Every four years I get sucked into watching the Olympics. Yes, every FOUR years because unlike most Canadians, I CAN tear myself away from the box for the winter version (although I do like watching the sports that create speed through unmediated sliding down a hill). And, every four years I watch and half-heartedly, in a purely localized fashion, participate in the most recent round of national hand-wringing. "Why don't we win more medals? What can we do to earn more medals?" etc., until we eventually end up in a painful examination of the Canadian psyche. It's draining and demoralizing on so many levels.
The title of the post comes from the name of a group that caused a tremendous ruckus back at the end of the 80s when Toronto was making its first bid for a summer games. As you might expect, given their name, this was not a support group. Their mission was to prevent the bid committee from completing its work and save money that would have been diverted to hosting the Games (circus) for good works, homeless and hungry people, etc. (bread). They weren't successful: Toronto lost fair and square after making a proper bid. Whether any of the money that would have been spent made anyone's life at the edge better is anyone's guess. I doubt it. Well, this and other such organizations have nothing to fear in the latest debate on funding athletes to shore up our lagging competitiveness. As this G&M represents, "No new money for Olympians."
I wish to weigh in as a matter of personal catharsis. So . . .
I hate to lose and I hate to be uncompetitive. If you're going to compete, then there is only modest consolation in being "among the best," which is what the also-rans have to hang on to when they're staring at the medal podium from the grandstand. We are the world's best sports because, in our own inimitable Canadian fashion, we sanctify the well-wishing high-minded deportment of the also-ran. (We're pretty good winners, too.) So I am bothered by the collective consoling we do with and to each other every time we're shut out or "hit under our weight.
Lest anyone think I've gone to the other side and joined the jingo-istic American competitive crew which has to overcome not winning everything and point out (at least on the network broadcasts) why, despite losing, everyone was concerned or threatened by, had to watch out for, or nearly lost to the American athlete(s). It was punishing to watch NBC's coverage of the American that was literally out of the race with insipid voice-over telling us how, if only there had been another ten metres or if the day had been windier, or whatever, then this also-ran would have been the one to beat. That driven win-or-nothing attitude -- and worse, behaviour -- is at once romantic and debilitating. It cannot appreciate the joys of both winning and of losing. Yes, there is also joy in losing (so long as it's not all the time). No I'm not there either.
But in Canada, our trouble is that we do punch under our weigh in many things, which in the current context means sports (save hockey), and we neither like it nor want to do anything about it. For 19 days in August and a few weeks after, some will stand on their hind legs and moan about how we're not funding sports enough to win. The implication being that not winning in international, amateur sporting competition is somehow a terrible thing. By mid-September, I predict, we will again have forgotten the situation what with the World championships of hockey being nearly over, parliament back in session, and concern over the hockey season (and its impact on our ability to field PROFESSIONALS in the coming Turin winter Olympics. And it won't come up again until winter 2006.
That doesn't solve the problem though. More money won't solve the problem. I think that Mark Tewkesbury (among others) is accurate: there is enough money to do better. It's just not being used well enough. Of course the American athletes -- and others probably -- are being paid and supported in greater wealth. So what. Take away the performance enhancers that it can buy and travel it can afford, and what does that have to do with natural ability and good coaching? We just like to bitch, and money is a good place to start -- and stop, apparently.
Much has been written recently, in certain editorial quarters, about the Canadian default position which one columnist portrayed in an apocryphal description of Sommerset Maugham: the very best of the second class. We are generally, say some, most comfortable, at the top of the second level. Rather than commit to the very top of the competitive pile where it is geometrically more difficult to move up one rung and therefore inversely likely to be defeated, we tend toward splendid mediocrity. Maybe so: if one reads a cross section, there would appear to be ample examples from many sectors, not just sport.
That is the problem for the elite athletes that do rise to the top. Where they have the opportunity to rise to the top because of solid and supportive infrastructure (club level programming, I'm told), they are often left in the lurch when they become as good as we can get in Canada. By which I mean, rather than give further support to those athletes that are, in fact, the best that we can field so that they will be the best the world has to offer, we as a nation seem to believe -- if actions bely words -- that's good enough. Except for hockey it seems, the drive to be best in the world does not have enough support except in these brief and shining moments of Olympic days to overcome a satisfaction with being best in Canada.
The missing link in logic is that for the best in Canada to be the best in the world (or near it), then Canada must be ranked among the very top of the world's offerings -- in whatever. Paradoxically, in order to be in that enviable position where the best in the country is equally likely to be the best in the world, the nation has to field and support more athletes in the realm of international events where they can become the best in the world. That, I would presume, will cascade down into the developmental programs at club levels, universities, etc., so that the internal competition is global "level." That requires planning, some money, focus, determination, support, and incomplaisancy.
I suspect such a situation would take us as a country and as a people beyond our level of satisfaction. And there, as any economist will tell you, the marginal returns (to our sense of self in this case) diminish. So, I'll watch the Games again in two and four and six years . . . in our national sporting version of Groundhog Day.
My SoCal blog buddy, The Window Manager, posted a possible reason for why Canadians dislike U.S. president Bush so much: lower unemployment in the U.S. than in Canada. Maybe; maybe not. Even if it were, it looks like it could be short-lived. At least if you look at the subtext of these items: (1) from CNET news (via G&M): U.S. call centre jobs moving to Canada and (2) lest we think that employment rates are holistic functions unaffected by other larger factors, from the G&M a story covering the U.S. Commerce Department's latest report: U.S. economy slows. Gotta look for another reason, I think.
I'm almost inclined to write a letter to the editor in response to this editorial (No to photo radar) in the G&M. But, finding a link to an electronic submission OR the email address is too much trouble. [This is probably why they don't put the email response link right at the bottom of the editorial/column/article: it might make it too easy for the reader to engage with the newspapers quasi-intellectuals. Dear Lord! No! Engagement with the citizenry the paper serves? Oh yeah, the paper serves the advertisers . . .]
Anyway, further to a tirade I posted here yesterday, the newspaper's pandering position to those who rallied behind the "common sense revolution," stating that repealing the photo radar of the NDP government was one of the most popular things that Harris did, is bunk.
Since when was public safety and sensibility a matter of popularity. That's the domain of politics -- a least in the minds of those of us who are jaded by the political process -- although even there it shouldn't be.
Photo radar isn't a "bad idea" on highways or otherwise, as the editorialist suggests, EXCEPT for political reasons. Harris cancelled photo radar as a political move because of the many tickets being issued -- likely to the 905-belt, luxury car driving core of his constituency -- were being tagged with speeding tickets. BECAUSE THEY WERE BREAKING THE LAW. [Hard for a "law and order" right-wing government to stand for that in-your-face flouting of the law when it's so black and white. Best to remove the evidence.] In that circumstance the "Orwellian echoes" and loathing of the photo radar are gibberish coming from an mind lacking any kind of rigour or independence.
In practice, the system is perfectly sensible. We are plagued here in Ontario by an geometrically increasing population of self-indulgent, obnoxious, poorly-trained, distracted, lead-footed drivers in vehicles that beg to be driven well beyond the speed limit determined (by the government) to be safe. Do something about it. Photo radar -- the threat or actual practice of hitting the wallet of those breaking the law -- does that.
But again, as I said before, it doesn't have to be a purely economic penalty if the optics of that are too hard to take. Use some imagination.
Or, just raise the speed limit and accept the increasing carnage. Whatever. Just stop writing stupid editorials with tenuous arguments that rest on irrelevant premises.
Another terrible and tragic loss of life and property, this time in Russia, as two airlines crash into fields almost simultaneously. (G&M story here: Workers search for clues in Russian airline crashes) I'm not one for conspiracy theory, and try not to jump to (ocassionally obvious) conclusions. But in this instance the early, though as yet unconfirmed evidence that one of the planes issued a distress signal used to indicate a hijacking added to the unnatural and highly unlikely synchronization of the planes' end is adequate to point to a plot.
As yet no terrorists have taken credit for this unholy (obvious Judeo-Christian position here, and backhanded slap at what *might* yet prove to be an al-Qaeda carried-out or inspired act) calamity. That is peculiar because one key element of terrorism is to take credit and assure those being terrorized that someone has wreaked this havoc, with the subtext that "we could do it again." But, as my friend The Window Manager suggests, the passengers and crew may very well have interrupted and thwarted plans for projecting these planes into the Kremlin, etc. So, it could be that the terrorists are ashamed at the "failure" and don't wish to publicize the event as being theirs lest they become the effective "gang who couldn't shoot straight" of the terrorist underworld. That could mean being the brunt of many practical jokes and jests.
As I write, I'm thinking that were this an al-Qaeda operation it would show a serious lack of imagination. Which, in turn, would suggest that the Americans (and allies) have been at least somewhat effective in rooting out the creative elements of the organization's "head." That bit of dubious induction on my part might indicate Chechen extremists or others with a genetic connection to al-Qaeda only.
To greater minds.
I can imagine that Jane magazine's creative minds spent more than a little time devising a promotion that would do what advertisers want: make consumers look at their ads (Advertising: Taking Pictures of Magazine Ads). But is taking a picture of an ad in a magazine with a mobile phone and sending it to Jane for a contest the kind of "looking" that ads value to the advertisers' efforts?
Frankly, I doubt it. The idea assumes persisting value in repetition. Although certainly one of the ways psychologists know that people remember, the question here is, "Remember what?" The ad's message or that it was used to enter a Jane contest?
Young consumers are proving that the advertising and promotional method of message saturation and high "impression" counts is, if not bankrupt, then ineffectual. If an advertiser is going to engage with a skeptical audience and bring them to what they really want (a sale), they need to engage with the consumer in a meaningful way that draws out a "conversation" and creates interest in an evolving and increasing way.
I don't think this promotion does that. But what the hell, stupider things have worked.
Microsoft's standard for standards and standards bodies seems standard for Microsoft. According to a VNUNET item (Microsoft pulls out of standards group over intellectual property concerns)) they've extricated themselves after a long association.
Microsoft has pulled out of an international standards body because of concerns over control of intellectual property contributed to the group.As far as Microsoft is concerned, our standard is my standard then you can pay for it. . . Or something like that.
Here in a G&M opinion piece (Time for directors to come clean on quitting), Janet McFarland uses the Magna director defection events noted here, below, as a springboard [. . . she starts with a 9.6 level of difficulty and executes with only minor deductions for a final score of 9.437 . . .] into the world of public disclosure from corporate governors. Worth a browse.
Good story about subsidiary company (to my employer -- Canada Post) epost in today's G&M: It's time to try getting your bills on-line. Rob Carrick's piece is so positive, and encourages readers to try EBPP, one might wonder whether he added anything at all to the press release from which the article must have sprung. Regardless, it addresses an interesting aspiration over at epost: "The epost goal is not only to expand its roster of billers, but also to develop the service to, as Mr. Couldrey puts it, "help you manage the business side of your life.""
As they say, they're delivering the future one bill at at time.
Photo radar is contentious. I've seen its effect in action in Calgary, where everyone drives at the speed limit even on the countless multi-lane "trails" that slice through the ever-expanding city. Now, it seems that Ontarians can expect similar treatment, as early as when the snow goes in the spring: at least according to the G&M item Ontario likely to back photo radar. Let's let the story show us the contentions.
Contention one: it's a public safety issue. That's true. There are, I notice, more and more people (and I'm one of them) going faster and faster on the roads. It's one thing to zip along 30km faster than posted (100km) on a 3-lane highway with ramped entrances and exits; it's quite another to be 20km over the posted 60km on a primary in-town artery with traffic lights, pedestrians and their cross-walks, cyclists, right angle entry/exit at a multitude of cross streets, and a much broader array of drivers and styles (e.g., emergency vehicles). It's the primary reason red-light photo equipment has been installed. Too many people ignoring traffic lights. I mean, what is this Egypt?
Contention two: it's about political control. This is a municipal issue (on local streets) not provincial. But the province holds the money and its municipal act is what gives the municipalities their rights and powers. So, the big brother has to approve. Small but significant issue.
Contention three: it's about revenue. That's what most people who argue against it say, and that's fair. It's well known that the threat of a ticket is more effective than tickets in reducing speed. Which, by the way, is what this program is substantially about. But, for those who are hard to learn, like people who don't pay their parking tickets, a substantial one or two-time economic hit has magnificent impact. I share this concern, but at the same time realize that there are consequences for breaking the law and, no matter what we've come to think, speeding IS in fact breaking the law. Besides, the penalty doesn't have to be economic. You could be compelled to do public good or lose your license to drive for some period. Cash cow argument: gone.
Contention four: it's invasive and extends government too much into our lives. Get a grip. The street is there for the public provided by the public. You use it according to the rules that are generally acceptable to, created by, enforced by the public. The government represents the public. So, since the road is not your private property, abide by its rules or the public will impose itself on you. Don't want to be "invaded" by the government? Stay off the road. It's a stupid argument.
Just some thoughts.
The government of the day is not moving far enough or fast enough for some in opening up the appointment of Supreme Court judges (2 open right now). But they are moving: or appear to be. The most recent announcement, captured in MPs will scrutinize nominees for Supreme Court, at the G&M, paints a story of interesting "consultation" of MPs -- but not much else. Here's the snip:
After intense negotiations, House leaders for the parties have reached an agreement on how to hold the hearings. . . The hearing before a panel of MPs and legal advisers will be televised tomorrow, sources said. . . . But the two new judges will not appear before the ad hoc committee to answer questions about their background and legal expertise. Instead, Justice Minister Irwin Cotler is expected to appear before the first-ever hearings into Supreme Court appointments. . . The process is a compromise designed to satisfy the legal community . . . The Prime Minister will retain the power to name judges and the panel cannot overrule his choices.. Mountains will become plains, but -- even with the help of a friendly earthquake -- not over night.
Click here to see how certain Oslo security guards are feeling about now.
Police need their "sources": those unnamed people and places where information -- some relevant, some not -- comes to them for their use in some way or another. The latest thing to hit the media radar screen, about a week ago, is that police in Canada now wish to expand their ability to make sources of our individual Internet activity as this G&M story describes: Police to seek greater powers to snoop. Last week's headline was more to the effect of police want more power to intercept Internet transmissions and they want you to pay for it. [An approach to funding that doesn't require additional tax-funded support, at least.]
The whole thing could, of course, be troubling. And so it is to privacy advocates. The linked article notes:
Police organizations have been saying for years that Criminal Code provisions for wiretaps, written in 1974, need amendments that would allow officers to monitor e-mail, Web surfing, instant messaging, mobile telephones, and telephone services that use Internet connections.Personally, I'm less concerned by the privacy implications despite the dire potential consequences of being electronically defiled unwittingly and without justification. Mostly because I have nothing that I would be overly troubled with anyone else knowing. Oh sure, it might be embarrassing: some things I've said over the years, I've grown out of and try not to associate with anymore; other things are just nobody's damn business. But, in general, the revelations would be mere wisps of embarrassment that would evaporate in the harsh light of public availability. Nobody seems to care that Hugh Grant was arrested for having a good time with a Hollywood hooker in his BMW a few years ago anymore.
"Privacy is not primarily about secrecy. It's about opacity."
A series of individually pedestrian stories have hit the media this week about goings on at the top of the Magna companies. First, it appears that Frank's found someone to replace his daughter at the nominal helm of the business. (Qualifications: business acumen, auto industry experience, willingness to let Frank do what he wants, direct family relationship not required but would be an assets . . .) The G&M story is here: Magna names new president. Then ol' Buttermilk Billy Davis abruptly leaves his positions on two of Magna's boards of directors (Bill Davis leaves 2 Magna boards). One of those was Magna Entertainment Corp. (MEC), the other MI Developments.
This wouldn't be such a big thing either until you add to it the latest (broke Friday and covered on Saturday) news of Brian Tobin also abruptly leaving his position as CEO of MI Developments and as a director of MEC: Tobin leaves Magna group. Add it all up, particularly the defections from MI and MEC at the director level, and I'm betting that something nasty is going to appear about that situation in the not too distant future. I mean apart from the minority shareholders getting screwed by Stronach. . .
Knew it was coming. Canadian broadband penetration has been faster than the US, but now that broadband has breached the plurality of American households, I can't understand how anyone could seriously say the Internet is not here to stay (and there are some of those . . . and you know who you are). The Computer Weekly article link quotes a study by NetRatings: and snip: Most US homes have broadband connections.In July, there were an estimated 63 million broadband users, or 51% of all home internet users, compared with 61.3 million dial-up users.
A year earlier, broadband users were just 38% of home internet users, at about 42.8 million, Ryan said.
The province of Ontario is to begin consultations with citizens to eliminate the mandatory "freedom 65 -- like it or not" retirement age according to this TorStar story: Ontario to ease 65-and-out rule It will, of course, have supporters and detractors, good and ill. CARP is big on it, but raises the next problem:
The Canadian Association of Retired Persons applauded the initiative but said it will press the government to change Ontario's human rights and labour codes to protect workers over 65 from discrimination.And then, of course, there's the question of what happens to the unemployment level when even more are eligible to work. Is anyone appreciating the need to expand the economy -- especially the labour need at the top and bottom of the skills ladder?
Canadian venture capitalists have popped their noses out and decided that they like the look of the weather. Venture spring could be just around the corner, especially in the humbled technology sector. According to a little item in the G&M, "The information technology sector accounted for 54 per cent of investments in the second quarter, up from 40 per cent in the first quarter." Link here: Venture capital investment up 48% in second quarter.
Costco testing its aisles with caskets (in the matress section, no less!). The G&M's story: Costco makes grave decision. Sorry, available only in the Chicago area.
". . . so let's see, we need cleaning stuff to take care of the apartment, food for the wake, and how about a pine box for the burial. Better take the half-ton, I don't think they deliver . . ."
More bad news for the admiral of Nortel. The mounties, who "always get their man," are starting a criminal investigation of the beleaguered company. The G&M has the story here: RCMP start Nortel criminal probe. To the best of my recollection, a criminal investigation needs a criminal, which is a person -- or persons, in the case of a conspiracy. Here's what the story says:
A Nortel spokeswoman said the RCMP didn't precisely define the scope of the investigation in the letter. "They didn't provide details whether it was company-specific or if it was executive-specific," said Tina Warren of Nortel.[Former CEO and beneficiary of a whopping bonus just prior to the floor falling through] Mr. Dunn did not return a phone call to his home. [Former CFO] Mr. Beatty could not be reached.
Expedia.ca and Ipsos-Reid did a poll and found out that a lot of us are not using our vacation time. More specifically, to quote:
The second annual vacation poll -- conducted by the travel website Expedia.ca and Ipsos-Reid -- found that 38 per cent of Canadian workers did not take all of their allotted vacation time within the last year.Read the whole G&M item here: Holidays? What holidaysThe poll of 1,000 adults found that so-called "vacation deprivation" has increased since last year. . . . indicating an imbalance between personal and professional time, [it] represents approximately $8-billion being handed back to employers in unused holidays annually across the country.
I'm not a strong Canadian nationalist by any means. And, as a philosopher of history, I understand that history is essentially a flow of changes. But, something pains me about the news that US Target stores are in advanced talks to acquire some or all of The Hudson's Bay Company, a retailer with a 300-year history in Canada. G&M story here: U.S. giant seeks to buy The Bay. What I mean: "The sale of HBC would leave Canada's oldest company in foreign hands . . ."
Intentionally or not, the Fed gave a bit of a reprieve to the Republican efforts to hold the White House today. As everyone knows, they raised short-term rate to abate inflation. The consequence of this action is to imply that the economy is humming along just fine. An implication that is contrary to the worries raised by the employment numbers that came out last week.
Economists in round rooms . . . The Washington Post has it covered here: Predicting Growth, Fed Lifts Key Rate
The Fed's action appeared to dismiss concerns that the economic recovery is faltering again, just months before a presidential election that could hinge on perceptions of the economy's health. While presidents in the past have urged the Fed to keep rates as low as possible, President Bush characterized the Fed's last rate increase, in June, as a sign the economy is getting stronger.
But critics said that by blaming oil prices for the recent dip in economic growth, the Fed was playing down the role of weak job and income growth in cooling the economy.
This ZDNet article's title and snip tell it all: Sun, Microsoft join on Web app standard
A consortium of major technology companies, including newfound allies Microsoft and Sun Microsystems, submitted on Tuesday a proposed new standard intended to promote interoperability between Web applications.
The BBC has put up another Bush speaking gaffe that approaches the level of Freudian slip. As the title here muses, I wonder if he was speaking on behalf of the Presidency and administration, the Republican party, or Americans in general. Here's the quote:
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful - and so are we," the US president told a high-level meeting of Pentagon officials.Check the video out at the BBC Site."They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people - and neither do we."
Two interesting headlines that provide interesting fodder for conspiracy theorist types from the middle through the left wing of the American political spectrum. Control of the news cycle for political purposes is one theme in this duality. Consider first, an article (admittedly in The Globe and Mail from Canada) that notes how the less-than-stellar recent economic numbers in the US may be causing the happy Republican message to resonate less clearly: U.S. economy sideswipes Bush. A snip:
Washington — The U.S. economy delivered a blow to President George W. Bush's re-election effort yesterday, as job creation fell well below expectations after a week of surging oil prices and a stock-market slide.That story, of course, comes from the Labour department release of information. But consider it in apposition to a story generated from a release by the White House's Homeland Security organization covered in this ABC News Online story: Al Qaeda seeking to launch new US attacks: Bush aide. The snip here:Mr. Bush has repeatedly said while campaigning that economic growth is "strong and getting stronger," but the U.S. Labour Department reported that only 32,000 new jobs were created in July, the lowest monthly total since last December. Economists last month predicted the figure would be more than seven times as high.
Al Qaeda militants are hoping to launch a major attack in the United States that will be even deadlier and more spectacular than the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, a top White House adviser said today.The first one came out on Friday news. The second one came out on Sunday morning television. Hmmm."They want something bigger than 9/11, they want a catastrophic attack," Frances Townsend, US President George W Bush's homeland security adviser, told the Fox News Sunday program.
Not so long ago, here and here, we noted that MTS was buying Allstream and that Bell was suing for an injunction to prevent it. Today the ROB notes that Bell just completed a deal to buy Bell West from MTS. The snip:
MONTREAL -- Completing a $645-million deal that helped Manitoba Telecom Services Inc. acquire Allstream Inc. for $1.7-billion, Bell Canada said Tuesday it has assumed full ownership of Bell West Inc.
Legal Grind cafes, in Santa Monica, is a coffee shop where lawyers dispense advice for a small fee. Its kind of like doin' deals from the "office" at the local Starbucks. As this NYTimes item (Offering Legal Advice and Lattes) notes, founder Jeff Hughes wants to franchise. Interesting. The snip:
Eight years ago, Mr. Hughes opened a cafe called Legal Grind in Santa Monica, Calif. Every weekday and Saturday afternoon, lawyers arrive at the cafe - which offers legal advice in addition to coffee - to make themselves available to customers for about 15 minutes for a $25 fee.
The funny thing about having a notebook that's open to the public is that eventually one would like to use the notebook to make notes. I'm self-referring frequently to things I saw and posted here. So, this piece about Virgin Mobile's entry in Canada is really all for me. Enjoy if you want: TheStar.com - Virgin Mobile dials up teen market
According to this Chicago Sun-Times piece (Yahoo testing local-focus search), Yahoo! is bringing to market a service that brings search and information to a very local level. Barry Diller's CitySearch is in the space; as will be Google. Here's the lead grafs:
SUNNYVALE, Calif. -- Yahoo! Inc., owner of the second-most- used Internet search engine, began testing a redesigned service Tuesday that helps consumers search more effectively for information about local businesses.The service, which competes with IAC/InterActiveCorp's Citysearch and others, compiles information from Yahoo's sites, including maps, local guides, Yellow Pages listings and professional restaurant reviews. Yahoo Local -- http://local.yahoo.com -- is adding local comments.
I was waiting in the grocery store the other day, and went to the books/magazines area (which, according to my wife, is an addiction of greater proportion than crack or tobacco -- to me, anyway). And it was there that I saw it: Anna Karenina in oversized pocketbook form, all damn-near 1,000 pages of it, in a beautiful new cover. But the best part was the wrapper on the book, and what it said: Anna Karenina had made it to Oprah's book club selection list. Now there are sure to be people (mostly women) coming to terms with Tolstoy's great tragedy about Karenin and his wife, her affair with Vronsky, and the social condition . . .
It is, like Tolstoy's other well-known works, marked by a few features. First, it is incredibly long. Second, the number of characters and plot line is hard to follow without a program over the typical reading time. Third, it is absolutely epic. Fourth, it's not an easy read where your eyes can glide over the pages for half an hour and you haven't missed much. Although long, it has to be devoured actively. Fifth, it is a compelling and some might argue timeless tale well told.
Good luck to Oprah's friends and viewers. This journey will be worth it. Too bad Leo isn't around to benefit from the royalties.
Out of context scripture reference is so wonderfully ironic, don't you think. This one refers to an item from canada.com about a kid in German who had a significant effect on the world: One boy: Internet chaos. The snip:
LONDON - A teenager arrested in May was responsible for 70 per cent of all viruses received worldwide in the first half of this year.It further reports that he's now looking for work in the computer security field. I'd hire him.Sven Jaschan, 18, was still at school in Germany when he admitted to writing and spreading the Sasser and Netsky.
Some of us believe that the electronic business environment will pick up substantially when there is a greater level of "trust" injected into what is intuitively a trustless paradigm. That is, people will feel more comfortable doing business on the Net when they have the benefit of a third party that will assure the transaction: a party they can trust. Consider the escrow agent (escrow.com) that provides that kind of service for eBay or the assurances of credit card companies to protect you from anything going wrong in an Internet purchase transaction when you use their (particular) cards.
But the NYTimes publishes this little thing, with reference to a Harris survey: The Count: In the Internet They Trust (Your Ad Here). A snip:
Whatever the reason, trust it they do. When making a decision about a major purchase, they trust the Internet more than parents, friends, knowledgeable professionals, books or articles, according to a Harris Interactive survey for Reply, an online referral service. The only source more trusted: a spouse. Touching.
This could be interesting: Are Sun really going to buy Novell ?.
Hoping that the charismatic leader and driving force behind Apple recovers from the pancreatic cancer surgery: Upbeat Jobs touts Apple product from his hospital bed. Should have everyone wondering about the succession there (again). Who is the design and vision driver for the future?
Gotta wonder if this isn't an example of looking too deeply: Schizophrenia linked to flu, study shows.
The act of observing changes the thing, I understand.