iPAD? Print?

Recently I dropped a few emails about a certain morning experience. My "friend" was having tea and saw a spider crawling up a wall. Not being much of a sports section fan, they casually rolled up that section of The New York Times and completed a major Smackdown of their eight-legged adversary. Throwing the paper away they realized, "hmmmmmmm, now there's something I could never do with an iPAD."

So I had to ask a lot of people I know what other things they could come up with. Here's what they came up with, just to show everyone how the print medium is truly not dead.

"You can't shred an iPad and line a hamster cage with it."
"You can't light a BBQ with an iPad, well you can, but the burgers will taste off..."
"Ya can't wrap fish in an iPad."
"You can never get free Yankees tickets from someone selling space on an iPad."
"You can't write a kidnap note by cutting up an iPad."

Please - feel free to add your thoughts on this matter...




Jeff Cannon
Think Cannon

What is Microsoft Doing With Bing?

What are the key words that I associate with a great search engine? Words like thorough, believable, unbiased, honest, integrity, consistent, user friendly, immediately come to me. There are others, but when I started writing, I was stunned that the same brand attributes I attached to a search engine are almost exactly the same as those I look for in a reliable news source. I am sure each of us has their own list of attributes that can fill in a particular blank, but I think you get the picture.

Why am I bringing this up? Well:

• First, I am in public relations and can see a spin a mile away
• Second, Microsoft's Bing just announced they surpassed Yahoo to become the #2 search engine in the world in just a few weeks
• Third, I noticed that when I enter a wrong URL in an Internet Explorer browser, I am automatically sent to Bing.com where the search engine is conveniently filled in with my error-ridden URL.

Now, while there is nothing inherently wrong with this "service", aside from it being incredibly annoying. While there is nothing illegal about this, it just reeks of being a shady marketing tactic. so much so, that I have begun to doubt Bing's integrity. I now wonder if the little lie they implied in their release is the way they do business in general. Yes, I now mistrust them. I have to ask, if they are willing to build a public relations campaign based on a little lie, how they are managing the rest of their business? Can I trust their search results? How do I know that the links they are sending you are truly an unbiased look into the web, or just another form of paid advertising?

Let me put it to you this way. Firefox's Mozilla established themselves based on the quality of their product. People tried it. They loved it. They passed it on. They raved about it. Mozilla Firefox then spread virally. There was no need for them to spin what was happening. It happened because Firefox was, and is, a great product - simple and true.

Unfortunately Microsoft failed to have the patience to let the consumer decide for themselves. In so doing, it has done a great disservice to itself by trying to spin something that is based in a false-hood. They did not do anything illegal, but their efforts were deceitful. They misled me, and a great many other people, with the idea that their product was just so popular that it took off by itself. When in fact, the growth was due to programming tricks like the default program on Internet Explorer. If you think I'm wrong, then try this little test. Enter the following URL into both IE and Firefox Mozilla - "www.google.colm".

On Firefox you will get an error message. On Internet Explorer you will get directed to Bing.com with your mistyped URL preloaded into the search bar: and Microsoft will tic off another person using Bing.

Bing - Unfortunately, I know Google. And you sir, are no Google - just a squeaky little program who's trying to buck the system. And in so doing, you are undermining your own service, your brand, and the brand integrity of the larger Microsoft.

Next time Think.


Think Cannon

www.thinkcannon.com

What's Eating You removes the slightest hint of integrity in this new show on Eating Disorders

After seeing their press release for the new reality show on E! - I can be nothing but appalled. While we all know that E! stands for Entertainment, with their new show, "What's Eating You," it also stands for "Extreme" or "Excessive" or "Exploitative" or just plain reckless and irresponsible. From their press release, this is not about help or health or saving lives. This is about trying to turn a deadly disease into entertainment - and that is wrong for those affected, it is wrong for advertisers thinking this is a way to reach their customers, and it is wrong for a brand - no matter how cheesy that brand may be. And yes, I'm speaking to you E!.

This is an excerpt from their release:

"From bizarre rituals to extreme habits, the worlds of the twelve brave participants will be an open book. From a woman who must put countless packets of artificial sweetener on anything she eats – including burgers and salads – to another who spends hours each day at different fast food restaurants, just to purge privately in a bevy of single-person bathrooms around town, audiences will follow the lives of people whose food behaviors are consuming and threatening their lives. Other stories include: a young man who will chew and swallow an entire pack of gum instead of eating food to feel satiated; a young woman who will eat ant-covered food out of a trash can, only to then purge in whatever she can find – her boots or even her purse; a young man for whom food is “dirty” and who, as a result, has a compulsion to wear rubber gloves before touching anything related to eating; a woman who drowns all of her food in gravy and has found other creative ways to eat around her gastric band and a young mother who wears layers and layers of clothes in the scorching Phoenix sun just to hide a body she feels is “sickly deformed” as a result of her pregnancies. In a particularly heartbreaking case, viewers also are introduced to a woman who was recently homeless and will drive 2 ½ hours to purchase her comfort food: white chalkboard chalk.

With the help of trained medical professionals, highly experienced therapists and nutrition specialists, these patients will attempt to begin the long, painful and often shocking journey to recovery. JD Roth, Executive Producer and CEO of 3 Ball Productions, said, “One might assume that a show about severe eating disorders would focus solely on participants’ bizarre behavior around food; but this show really is about the incredible fortitude and strength of people with intense obstacles to overcome, and how they strive to get their lives back on track. We’re very proud to be working with E!, not only in shedding light on a dangerous issue, but also in offering hope and a path to recovery.”

Seriously? Is this the work of anyone even remotely responsible? Regardless of what their logo says with the big E!, it is just plain EXPLOITATIVE. There is a difference between an article labeled "Stars, they're just like us," and a show that focuses on the very worst of a disease. Their press release alone reads more like a script for a freak show barker than for television programming. I could expect to see this in the darkest recesses of the Internet, but not on an FCC controlled medium like television.

If you are wondering how a legitimate brand could produce programming that delves into a subject like eating disorders responsibly - just look at A&E's "Intervention" [www.aetc.com/intervention/about]. Their approach actually does focus on hope, on redemption, and on life. They even went further to create something called the Recovery Project, to create outreach material, and to encourage people to participate in helping others. It is a responsible approach that positions the A&E brand in a responsible light.

E!? nothing of the sort. Even before their show goes live, they are focusing on "a young woman who will eat ant-covered food out of a trash can," who will "purge into whatever she can find - her boots or even her purse," or of another who feels she is "sickly deformed."

As for the producer of the show - 3 Ball Productions - they were the company that produced The Biggest Loser. A show that has been blamed for actually causing a contestant to develop an eating disorder. It is hardly any wonder as to the integrity of the producers behind the show when they've received some startling reviews by their own employees.

All in all, E! actually has a good brand for the type of programming they have developed in the past. So why would the risk undermining tne value of their brand and the brands of their advertisers by producing content like this? There is only answer - greed and a desire for short term profits over long term growth. It is a shame. But that is what happens when you make decisions that aren't focused on brand growth.

E! we can only watch and see what happens.

Think Cannon

Eat, Pray, Love & Home Shopping Network? Really?

I recently read about the new movie Eat, Pray Love. Well, not actually about the movie, but about the merchandising deals they are putting together to help promote it. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm all about branded entertainment and licensing deals. I am also all about trying to find a novel way to target a niche audience. But only in the right CONTEXT. Because if content is king, then context is truly the queen.

To create branded content deals effectively means thinking beyond demographics and viewer patterns. It means looking deeper than basic psychographics in order to find the emotional core that has brought a group of customers together. Because that is the glue beneath any customer base. Hence my outrage and my blog.

When I learned that the people behind the marketing of "Eat, Pray, Love" put together a deal with HSN as a way to promote the movie, I was leery. When I learned their strategy was to create a win/win opportunity to pay for some of the marketing by selling products "tied to the theme of the movie," my brain scratched like an old LP. Selling products? Tied to the theme of the movie? Have none of them read the book?

Not to jump to quickly, I took a look at what "products tied to the theme of the movie" meant. Did they mean the Perlier-Italian beauty products "brought to you by the Royal Borghese family" for two easy payments of $19.93? Did they mean Hutton Wilkinson's "Balinese inspired Love rings in simulated Ivory" at $29.95? Or perhaps they meant Lancome's "Eat, Pray, Love Juicy Tube Lip Gloss" for two easy payments of just $18.00. However they came up with their product mix, or even the idea of the co-branded promotion, congratulations. I think you have done more harm to a growing and beloved brand than I have ever seen. Perhaps if we buy a complete set we can get our balance, love and spirituality for just three easy payments!

Did the creators of this marketing program completely forget about context? Did they fail to look at the truth behind the Eat, Pray, Love phenomenon? Did they disregard how deeply the readers of this book care for the character and for the author's life experiences? To find that message of hope, rebirth, and love being splayed to hawk wares on HSN is not only a shock. It is a complete disregard for the intelligence of the brand's fans, and for the lessons from the book itself. Even worse, it undermines everything it takes to create a truly effective brand-driven marketing campaign - context and compassion for the brand and the customer.

If the Eat, Pray, Love brand were a laminated table. You would not be selling the plywood beneath the beautiful laminate. Yet this is what the marketers seem to be doing in this case. They're selling the commercial elements around the brand. And isn't that what got Elizabeth in trouble in the first place? An attraction to worldly indulgences instead of finding that balance between the material and the spiritual?

What is almost criminal about this effort to promote an quickly beloved brand, is that the marketers behind it risk destroying the brand altogether, all for a few quick bucks. Why not think long term? Why not think outside the commerce box? Why not look for the truth behind a story that obviously resonated with so many? After all that is what attracted so many people to this book. Not $19.95
angles, but the experiences of one woman.

I just hope Julia has what it takes to transcend the Home Shopping Network's commercialism and bring out the truth behind Eat, Pray, Love. For the brand's sake if no other...


Think Next Time.


Think Cannon

Andrew Cuomo - Showing a Scary Brand Consistency

There was an incredible article that was at once innocent, insightful, and scary. I appeared in the New York Times this weekend [Sunday, June 20, 2010] about Andrew Cuomo. Well, not about him, per se, but about his choice in partners and their ability to cook. It also speaks to the truth behind the Cuomo brand and to what we could expect from him if he assumes office in the future. Now, I know politicians are famouse for their ability to spin facts. But this article adds a new way to uncover the truth - I call it the lasagna factor.

To some, my take on this article may seem a throwback to another era of housewives dutifully putting a hot meal on a table. But to me, nothing speaks about character as honestly as food does. And this one speaks to Mr. Cuomo's character. Now, I don't mind that he chose a "perfect housewife" to round out his reputation for a harsh personality. After all, he was called the dark prince" when he first joined politics on his father's campaign at the young age of 24 for a reason. I do wonder what he must have done to be called the "dark prince" while working for dad's campaign at the tender age of 24. But that is neither here nor there.

The article innocently enough deals with the lasagna recipe his girlfriend, significant other, or whatever he wants us to call her, had included in her cookbook. Simply put, it was disgusting, and something that does not bode well for the food channel [condensed Cambell's tomatoe soup instead of a sauce? cottage chese?]. Now, I can't speak for all people, but I think the levels of disgust that come in the form of 144+ comments [at the time of writing] on his choice of mates and their recipes from around the country are consistent enough to add credence to a Lasagna test for all candidates.

Andrew Cuomo's own mother refers to the recipe in question by noting "that is not how you make a lasagna." It is as if readers from every walk of life can ascertain the true nature of a person by the food they make. And they are disgusted that Sandra Lee's "recipe from a sponsor jar" approach tells us exactly what he is peddling - a badly wrought image that will crumble faster than a highschool cafeteria lasagna.

To me, Sandra's lasagna brings to mind a larger question. If this is they way his significant partner cooks and acts [i.e., badly and as a bought and paid for pitch person], if this demonstrates her belief in the integrity of a family meal, then what does this say about the way he will manage the State of New York?

Perhaps it says nothing at all. Or perhaps it says that if he will compromise on one of the most basic of needs for himself - the food he eats and the company he keeps - what will he do for the State of New York?


In my opinion, something as simple as lasagna speaks to the very essence of who anyone is. It is a family meal that centers on the love of simple food, of real ingredients, and on putting in the time to make it right. Is this who Andrew Cuomo is? Because this recipe speaks of a person who couldn't care less about the food they eat, or the people they dine with. It speaks more to a person willing to sell out his own integrity to build an image he wants to portray, rather than to be himself. It speaks to a person who is trying hard to create a brand for himself that is diametrically opposed to the real him. We saw what this approach led to when Elliot Spitzer became Governor. We also saw what happened when the "green petroleum" company BP failed to live up to their brand.

So for me, the humble dish of lasagna says it all. It says I do not like where Mr. Cuomo is going. And yes, I can say that, after reading Ms. Lee's recipe, all of this can be tied to something as simple as a lasagna recipe and the way a person cooks.

http://alturl.com/tjdx

Just take a look at the recipe yourself. The lasagna tells all!

Jeff Cannon

Think Cannon

http://www.thinkcannon.com/

Is Twitter Weighing Itself Down, or who created the Fail Whale?

This morning I logged into Twitter for what I thought would be a simple post. I came in at 102 words, incorporated a short URL into the message, as well as a few hash marks, and clicked to Tweet. Low and behold, that magic whale came up and told me "Something is technically wrong. Please try again in a moment."

Hmmmmmm, something is wrong? I waited. I clicked again. The same white whale came up. Is something wrong I asked myself? I saved my message, logged out and logged back in. Only to receive the same message. Is something wrong with me? Or is it Twitter? Is the hardware not up to the task Twitter created? Did the people behind this phenomenon underestimate the power of their own PR and media placements? Did they not read their own coverage? Or perhaps they just didn't trust it.

Well, I just could not resist. So I went to the old reliable standby - Google. I Googled "Twitter Whale." There were 8,440,000 results - and none of them good. That's more than Moby Dick gets, and he's been around a long while. I then Googled "Fail Whale" as the Twitter whale is being called by 2,450,000 sites. Hmmmmm, I think they may have started another phenomenon without even trying. I also think they could stand to learn something from the American auto industry. In fact, I think they could learn something from a book on customer experience in order to realize they have a massive problem brewing. Or has it already been over-brewed?

Don't get me wrong. It's great that Twitter was created. It's great that it grew so quickly. In many ways it has become the 21st Century version of the 1-sheet that Winston Churchill created when he told his staff never to approach him with an idea unless they could reduce it into one 8 1/2" by 11" of paper that is known as the 1-sheet so many of us rely on. Twitter forces us to put our ideas into a concise line of text that is less than 140 characters. Not so easy for many people who just love to ramble.

However, those 140 characters of brilliance [Beiber, Kutcher - are you listening?] are not worth much if they require forty-three minutes of re-clicking a "submit" button. That comes out to almost 3.4 minutes per character typed. At $100 per hour [a billing rate for most agencies], that comes out to about $5.67 per letter.

TWITTER - ARE YOU WORTH $5.67 FOR EVERY CHARACTER I TYPE?

I really don't think so. You're making newspapers seem inexpensive!

Really Twitter, I love what you've done for us. But even Kardashian is cheaper than that. And she gives good tweets.





think
thinkcannon
Think Cannon

Chevy - Still screwing up the old fashioned way

Is it really true that Chevrolet just issued a memo telling its employees not to refer to the brand and company as "Chevy?" Is it really true that they decided the best way to upgrade their brand was to have consumers start calling the company by its full name? Haven't they heard that they don't really own their own brand, but their customers do? They are now brand stewards, but they are still not listening to their customers.

The last time I ran into something like this was in my college days when a very drunk, line-backer looking frat boy accosted me in a party for calling his organization a "frat." His logic was that calling his house a frat was like calling our country a, well you get the picture. I did not get the logic back then, and I still do not get the logic now. Hey, but maybe that same guy is now consulting for Chevy. Who knows, stranger things have happened since college...

Anyway, back to the case at hand. In the memo issued by Chevy [oops, Chevrolet], they refer to such momentous brands as "Coke" and "Apple" as a rationale for why they are insisting on using the full brand name. Uh, "Coke" as in Coca Cola? Or Apple as in when was the last time you heard an Apple product refered to as an "Apple" - what was it 1984? Now Appled products are referred to by their product names iPod, iPad, iFad. Oh wait, for a while people were calling one of the greatest consumer electronics product, the largest computer manufacturer as of late a "Mac." Oh, but that's short for what Macintosh?

Perhaps the marketing execs at Chevy [damnit] are watching too much MadMen? Or perhaps they have chosen to overlook the changes in the advertising industry for the past twenty years, but this decision by Chevy [there I go again] is not even retro. It's just bad marketing.

Newsflash Chevy - YOUR CUSTOMERS LIKE CALLING IT A CHEVY. MOST OF THEM DON'T EVEN REMEMBER WHAT CHEVROLET WAS IN THE 50's. So let it go. People have loved the Chevy ever since Don McLean sang about it. What they don't like is the old stodgy idea of Chevrolet, Nuclear bomb shelters in the back yard, the Cold War, and McCarthy [not the former Beatle].

I have posted the memo below. Please, don't drool when your chin hits your keyboard.


--------------------------

Chevrolet Team,

We wanted to write you a quick note requesting your support of our Chevrolet Brand. When you look at the most recognized brands throughout the world, such as Coke or Apple for instance, one of the things they all focus on is the consistency of their branding. Why is this consistency so important? The more consistent a brand becomes, the more prominent and recognizable it is with the consumer. This is a big opportunity for us
moving forward.

As you know, we are investing substantially to improve the consistency of our retail facilities through the EBE process. Aside from the facilities aspect of our branding, there are many other ways in which we can demonstrate this consistency. One way to achieve this is with the use of Chevrolet vs. Chevy. We’d ask that whether you’re talking to a dealer, reviewing dealer advertising or speaking with friends and family, that you communicate our brand as Chevrolet moving forward.

We have a proud heritage behind us and a fantastic future ahead of us … speaking to the success of this brand in one consistent manner will ensure Chevrolet becomes even more prominent and recognizable than it already is.

Thank you for your support of this effort!

Alan and Jim

P.S. We put a plastic “Chevy” can down the hall that will accept a quarter every time someone uses “Chevy” rather than Chevrolet! We’ll use the money for a team building activity.

Yves Saint Laurent Scores With The Met's Partnership

Last night I had the tremendous opportunity to attend the New York Metropolitan Opera's premiere of Rossini's Armida. Starring Renee Fleming and directed by Mary Zimmerman, this was not only a stupendous opera, a chance to see the stars on the red carpet, and a delicious evening of food, music, and talent - it was an opportunity to see how a team of true professionals execute a brand-driven partnership with bottom-line results.

For those who know nothing of the opera, don't worry. I can send you some links from the professionals of tone and oration. For those of you who are tired of seeing photos of celebrities like Chloe Sevigny and Maggie Gyllenhaal flood the social blogs, well, that's just part of the realities behind building brand's awareness and securing its position in the hearts, minds, and souls of its clients.

For you branding and marketing wonks, you may want to know that the premier last night was the latest in a multi-year partnership that Yves Saint Laurent created with the Metropolitan Opera. It started years ago when YSL was looking for ways to connect with their clients in an authentic and compelling manner. After looking at its own historic affiliation to the opera, and the passion both its employees and its clients have for the arts, it settled on an unprecedented collaboration to the opera art form via New York's Metropolitan Opera.

The result? Just Google "YSL Armida" - there's 15,700 website links that come up. Google "Yves Saint Laurent Armida" - there's another 16,200 website links. Google "Yves Saint Laurent opera 2010" - 12,800,000 links, and an additional 641,000 links for "Yves Saint Laurent Opera." If you want to see what these 13 million links look like - just click on some of the shortcuts I have added below and ask yourself, how would your brand enjoy this kind of reach and frequency...

So net/net - what's the media value of this? I can't even begin to guess. But this alone is in excess of thirteen million links; and we're not even googling the past operas like Filles Du Regiment that YSL collaborated on in 2009. When you combine the online coverage with the added value of being associated with celebrities like Bette Midler, Christine Baranski, Julianna Margulies, Parker Posey, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Peter Sarsgaard, Patricia Clarkson, Chloë Sevigny, Ginnifer Goodwin, Emily Mortimer, Alessandro Nivola, Camilla Belle, Sid and Mercedes Bass, or Ann Ziff - the result is, well, it's unbelievable.

As important YSL's own internal celebrities - Valérie Hermann (CEO, Yves Saint Laurent), Stefano Pilati (Creative Director), and Laura Lendrum (President - Americas) - were able to reach out and touch the people that truly matter most to the company - their high-end and beautiful clients. Again, what would your company do if it had the chance to actually touch some of your most valuable customers in the flesh?

So to all you marketing wonks out there - take heed when someone tells you it's impossible to reach the high-end, high-value clients in a meaningful way. Take heed when people tell you it's impossible to put a value to event, online, and non-traditional marketing. A partnership like this one, that is created with a brand's true nature in mind, is nurtured through a passionate belief in the core values a brand represents, and extends through direct contact with customer, clients, and prospects can have a real and lasting value to both the brand and the clients.

YSL - well done...

Oh, and for just four of those links ...


http://www.tiny9.com/u/WWD
http://www.tiny9.com/u/sevigny
http://www.tiny9.com/u/camilla
http://www.tiny9.com/u/broadway_world







Jeff Cannon
www.thinkcannon.com

Tea Party - Time to Get On Brand

The most recent news about the new Tea Party movement is just so sad; not because of the violence, and the racial slurs that come out of the party, but because of how much opportunity they had to be a real movement of change. Don't get me wrong - I'm not a member of the party or a card carrier on the left. I'm just a guy who liked the fact that a group of Americans had gotten together and had taken action on something they believed so strongly in. Whether it was on the right or the left of the political spectrum - they had started to make a difference.

What makes it sad is that this group has started to turn into something worse than an unruly mob. They went from making valid statements and holding legitimate protests, to throwing bricks through windows and degrading their detractors with racial slurs. When reports sound about Tea Party members using the "N" word against the icons of the civil rights movements - like the 70 year old Emmanuel Cleaver - or the "F" word against gay members of congress, it just shifts the image of Tea Party members away from a being a valid political caucus, over to being a bunch of illiterate bigots. And no, that's not the same thing as being a redneck.

Now I know some people may be saying "that's not us." But when you have Tea Partiers like Amy Kremer show up on Fox News to dismiss what she called an "isolated" incident [I'm sorry Amy, it's still NOT OK if only a few are racists - racism is BAD in any number]. Or when you have bricks with misspelled messages coming through the windows of the Democratic Committees [I mean seriously, you can't take 60 seconds to do a quick dictionary check?]. You have to admit, even the Tea Party is taking these actions seriously. It's just a shame they can't stay on message long enough to establish themselves as an informed group.

Monroe County Democratic Committee, via Associated Press

Some have even accused the democrats of infiltrating peaceful Tea Party crowds with plants who shouted the slurs in question. But seriously, the democrats aren't even coordinated enough to keep a majority in the House and Senate. Besides, I don't think the Democrats would shoot out their own glass doors in Phoenix.

So to all the Tea Party acolytes out there - get it together. I may not like everything you say, but you are at least a step toward everyone seeing some kind of ongoing change in Washington. The only thing you have to do is to keep it together and maintain a DIALOGUE that supports the brand and message you started. Yes, it means policing your own and weaning out the racists [nobody said brand management is easy], but if you can do that, you have a chance of making history. If not, you'll be quickly relegated to being just another fringe group of bigoted, angry, and narrow-minded people who are being backed/used by wealthy individuals with larger agendas - which is something this country just doesn't need on either side of the conservative/liberal coin.



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/26/us/politics/26threat.html?scp=1&sq=brick%20rochester&st=cse

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/25/wealthy-donor-sues-tea-party-convention-organizer-palins-fee/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/22/tea-party-protesters-dispute-reports-slurs-spitting-dem-lawmakers/




Jeff Cannon

www.ThinkCannon.com

Keeping it Real Lord Winterton

Well, it seems as if one of our brethren in the United Kingdom's conservative party did the unthinkable - he was honest. Technically, Tory, Sir Nicholas Winterton went "off message" when he spoke about not liking to travel with the common man. “They are a totally different type of people,” Sir Nicholas declared in a recent radio interview. He also spoke about the "ghastliness of people in standard-class train cars." "There’s lots of children, there’s noise, there’s activity. I like to have peace and quiet when I’m traveling.”

Now I don't find anything wrong with what he said. Honestly, we would all love some quiet travel time. However, it doesn't really ring true when the Tories have been working so hard to convince their voting Brits that they actually are very much in step with the "common man." Which is why this is less about staying on message, and more about making sure your message is true to heart.

The reality is that no matter how much Sir Winterton rides around on a bicycle - never mind the fact that his limousine followed him, carrying his briefcase, or was educated at Eton - the long established finishing school of the aristocracy and bastion of the wealthy, or married into some estranged arm of the royal family - I lost track of his wife's relation to some long dead king [was "king" supposed to be capitalized?], he is still an aristocratic old man who can scream as much as he likes about enjoying a pint with the working man, but can't escape the truth of who he is.

It is very similar to some of the politico's in these United States that like to talk about being a maverick, or being one with the common man, or bi-partisan, yet still have their hands deep in the pockets of special interest groups and corporate fund-raisers.

So the big lesson here is be true to yourself. If you are, then being true to your message should never be a problem. Nor should being "off message" ever be an issue. All it takes is personal fortitude - which is apparently lacking in most politicians these days. Hmmmmm, perhaps that's the bi-partisan element we've all been seeking in our candidates - personal integrity and fortitude.

So Sir Nicholas Winterton stop trying to pretend. Enjoy who you are and what you have. We all hate screaming kids on our commutes. Take a note from William F. Buckley - and be true to who you are - the truth will eventually come out anyway.

Just be prepared to live the person you really want to be, and accept the consequences for your actions.



Jeff Cannon
ThinkCannon.com

Today's Realty Shows Have Turned Scripted

Alas - long gone are the days of real outbursts and unplanned snaffu's. Long gone are the talent who really had little idea of what they were getting into. For better, or for worst, today's reality shows are no better than scripted programming. Only now, the directing is being done in the editing bay, and the on-screen talent isn't being paid nearly enough for their performances.

The "realty" brand is truly a brand that has lost its integrity. So, when Real Housewives of New York hits the airwaves again this year, the shame of it is that everyone knows they aren't even from New York City. Nor are they even going to be caught unawares. Instead, they're all feeling their own semi-celebrity. They're all trying to make a splash out of a ripple when the red light of the camera goes on. But the worst part of it is they're not even doing it well. Even shows like Project Runway is bringing in a group of wanna-be celebrities, rather than real designers. The producers have a say in who goes and who stays. So if you ever wonder why sometimes a good designer is "auf weidershened" when a weepy one is kept on. It's their way of directing the drama.

As Lincoln Hiatt - the executvie producer for Solitary on the Fox Reality Channel, calls sleep deprivation "a producer's ally on almost any show."

So that is how they get drama when it's needed. Keep them up later, add some caffeine or bring in the wine.

Gosh, had I known how easy directing is, I would have made a career change much earlier.

But isn't is a shame that the concept of a "reality show" has lasted for less than a few years. Instead, it has moved into the realm of trash - read Jersey Shore. And as the brand goes, so to shall the advertisers and sponsors. A shame, because it could have actually been a goose, rather than a golden egg that is already cracking....


Jeff Cannon

www.thinkcannon.com

Royal Caribbean Still Hitting Haiti for R&R - Niceeeee

Has anyone been keeping up with Royal Caribbean cruiselines? It seems as if they just can't stay away from destroying a tropical paradise with their multi-storied cruise ships - even if it's already been destroyed. I guess ripping up delicate barrier reefs with their anchors, emptying human waste into the oceans, and making a mess of down-trodden local economies just isn't enough to keep those "all you can eat" lunch bar-goers feeling good about themselves. Oh no, they've got to continue cruising into Haiti to make sure their travelers can literally look down on an even more devastated eco-system than they usually do.

Welcome to Royal Caribbean's post-earthquake tour - http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/ship_of_ghouls_tKJpR6oDf07YZvP7LR2FNP.

As of January 19th, they were still cruising into Haiti, while hundred's of thousands starved, amputated appendages, and died. Hmmmmmm, I don't know about the branding of cruislines in the past, but really. REALLY!!!!

According to NPR, "the CEO of Royal Caribbean International says the company's cruise ships are still arriving in Haiti." HELLOOOO!!!!!!! Despite the fact that the ships have delivered relief efforts to the island, some passengers on the ships are reportedly "sickened" over the decision to dock there. One passenger took to an Internet message board to protest the idea of vacationing where "tens of thousands of dead people are being piled up on the streets, with the survivors stunned and looking for food and water."

I don't even think I have to go into how wrong this is on the business, brand, or even human levels. Seriously, you don't need to hire a PR person, or even a branding expert, to discuss this. It's just simple common sense - and I don't mean the kind that's not that common....

Building Your Brand Fabric

Flannel or silk? Cotton or wool? Cut on the bias? Embroidered or embellished with appliqué? What does your garment look like? We have all gone through the exercise of branding 101 by asking, “if your brand were a person, who would that person be?” In today’s market, however, it’s more important to ask yourself, “What would they wear?”

Today, effectively communicating your brand is less about identifying the person your brand represents, and more about identifying how to communicate your brand’s message so that it is well received. While the core of your brand should be true to itself your message should be refined to fit the medium being used. The reason is simple, people change based on what they are doing. They dress casually on the weekend. They ratchet it up a notch or two for work. On a date, they bring out the little black dress or the right jacket. Black tie? A whole different story, altogether. It’s no different in the media. People are more serious when they read the paper. Less so when thumbing through a magazine, and when on Facebook or Twitter, it’s all about two-way interaction.

Think about your own mind-set. It is why most of the world has multiple accounts on dating sites – one for the “playful” side, one for their “serious” side, and one for the “tiger or tigress in everyone”.
Because of this, repeating the same tagline just doesn’t work in today’s media. However, learning how to revise a brand’s message to make the most of today’s media, is akin to looking at a bolt of fabric for its thread, rather than its design. The threads woven into a bolt of fabric are like the media woven into a communication campaign. When Twitter is combined with television, and a Facebook page is interwoven with a newspaper ad, the entire marketing mix produces a richer fabric that sells better.

Subtlety is the key to make the garment interesting and appealing to the customer. While they all need to echo the same brand, a Twitter Tweet has to be short, sweet, and pithy. A Facebook page needs to be consistently updated and fun. A print ad needs to be bold, brash and stand out from the news. If one thread is inconsistent, the fabric of your brand starts to unravel, and your customers will quickly see the faults.

When executed correctly your communications will create a gorgeous garment that will look great and sell, whether it is being “worn” online or offline. Just remember, the beauty of your brand lies in the cloth itself and in the way it is woven together, rather than in the person wearing it. So if you are wondering how best to communicate your brand through all the new media opportunities, do what the great fashion designers have done and start with great fabric. Then let it go and empower your customers to show it off everywhere they go. They will pick up the threads of your message and build an even more powerful brand fabric for you.

To learn the five steps to weaving your own brand fabric, email

info@thinkcannon.com.

Jeff Cannon

http://www.thinkcannon.com/

http://twitter.com/thinkcannon

30,000 Years of Social Networking

Over the past few weeks I have been reading about different archeological finds, new ways of looking at existing artifacts. Things started popping out at me, that congealed this past weekend - amazing what a day off will do. So bear with me on this, but...

Tens of thousands of years ago Homo sapiens [the first real step toward modern man] created the first knock-offs. These took the forms of fake shells that were found around highland campfire sites. Yes, land-locked ancient humans started creating fake shells out of soap stone, mimicking the shells of far-off tribes. You have to ask yourself why?

It wasn’t New York City's Canal Street where ancient tourists and label-seekers in loin-cloths were looking to buy the latest logo accessory. Or was it? What would make someone, who had to fight every day for survival, take time out to carve a shell bead to hang around their neck? Did they just want to look like a far-off tribe that lived by the sea? The answer is apparently, yes. Call it one of the first forms of social networking. Call it one of the first uses of technology [bone carving tools in that day] to connect with other, like minded people. Technology may have changed, but human nature has not. We have merely changed the technologies we use to keep up with the basic human need to create a community.

Face it, we like other people.

Think about it, back then, early Homo sapiens and Cro-Magnon lived in tribes of perhaps 25 “people.” Each had their own language, as it were, their own signs, and their own look – think fur garments for land-locked tribes, versus reeds for sea-side tribes. When tribes met, they had a pretty quick choice to make. They could make friends or they could fight. So the ability to quickly show another tribe that they were similar and should be friends became a pretty important task. So, when not killing a deer or running from a tiger, making beads to show others they should talk and trade probably ranked up pretty high for anyone looking past tomorrow. They were making beads, not just to show off, but to connect with other tribes, to show others that they were of like minds. Think of how powerful a knock-off bead must have been 30,000 years ago.

Think things have changed? They haven’t. As tribes expanded, the people of the day started banding together under staffs, under banners, under flags. Roll forward several thousand years, to the ancient Greeks. These people grouped together under the banners of city-states like Sparta and Athens. They made treaties, they warred, they died. Then larger societies like Rome came into being. We humans were far from content to be of one people. We created social networks within each of these countries – the rich and powerful separated themselves from the commoners, and well above the slaves by their look and their mannerism.

A better example of this can be found in Rome's upper classes. In the day, they used a purple dye - Tyrian purple – to set themselves apart from other Romans. It was made from glands found in a specific sea snail. Anthroplogist, David Jacoby, remarked that "twelve thousand snails of Murex brandaris yield no more than 1.4 g of pure dye, enough to color only the trim of a single garment." i.e., it was expensive and only a few could afford it.

Apparently it produced a hideous stench, that ancient authors noted, but the cost of producing it was so high, the well to do didn’t care about the smell. What it did was create instant recognition among those of the upper classes, based on how much of a garment was purple. Just trim, or the whole robe? It was one of the first instances of class identification that went beyond country borders. Leaders in other places tried to replicate it with local dyes, with not so great results. But again, it was humans using the latest technology, gland extraction and dye development, to identify and isolate a community within a larger world.

For the next several hundred years, the sense of community has moved away from country borders, and more toward class. Up until about fifty years ago, one’s mannerisms and the way one dressed, spoke, and acted better showed the community one belonged to, than sewing a flag onto a garment. Think - the House of Windsor talking with Nazi Germany - community over borders. But, something happened. The ability to manufacture products at a higher quality and lower cost began to undermine the value of a luxury brand's label. Don't get me wrong, branded labels didn't go away. Instead, the concept of “mixing labels” appeared. People started venturing away from large stores in search of "they're own look". Once again, it was new technology - the ability to travel - that became the new social identifier. "Oh, look what I picked up in Paris..."

Then, along came the Internet, and once again, the technology of social networking changed.

Today, people are using Facebook, Twitter, Linked In, even creating their own, more personal social networks to retain a sense of social order. Don’t get me wrong, the old labels still matter. But new tribes are being formed. Power comes in different shapes today. Look how Twitter has been used among Iranian anti-government intellectuals. See how China is trying to shut down Google as a means to keep its own classes in line. Oh wait, they’re a classless society - oops...

From the day of sitting for hours to carve a single bead, to creating a page on Facebook, to developing a clique within a social network, it has all been a part of the human experience. So why fight it? Those who win, are the ones who learn to use the new technology, who learn to make friends, and who learn to work with a network of like minded people. It is the way humans have always managed to outgrow the competition – whether it lions, tigers, bulls or bears….

They've just turned to SEO, SEM and Keyword marketing...

Harry Reid & His Smart Obama Statement

How many times have we seen this? Someone makes a statement that's so offensive it creates a tremendous splash in the press. They then apologize for it. Everyone forgives everyone. The world moves on. But the original person has made a mint from the media shock. Well, Harry Reid did it in his book, and has done it well. He'll do the talk show circuit, make headlines across the country and around the world, and in the end, he will save millions of advertising budget for five key words entwined in his comment of "Barack Obama could become the country’s first black president because he was “light-skinned” and had “no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.” If you haven't seen it, take a look at the New York Times.

Now, I'm not even going to go into my thoughts on this - whether it is accurate or not, whether it is true or not, or how incredibly distateful it was. After all, he has been friends of President Obama for quite some time. But has Harry hurt his brand in this? Not really. Those in the know, know about his relatioship with the President. His core followers will continue to follow him. Those that already dispise him will contine to do so. And, those in the middle will draw sides, then forget about this as the media cycle moves on. Harry has apologized for his comment in the past (it was accepted by the Rev. Al Sharpton). He is also apologizing for it now, but I would hasten to guess his current apology is more about the media than taking real blame. Besides, he knows exactly what he's doing with this. He is creating a media frenzy FOR HIMSELF.

Once again, the world of music [think Kanye West and Taylor Swift] and the world of politics have come to align themselves by using the same tactics of "Smash & Grab" to get whatever they're pitching sold. I'm hardly surprised that Harry Reid did this. I'm just surprised that the media is falling for it ONCE AGAIN!!!!!

The Branding of China's Prisons

I just read an article about China's drug rehabilitation program [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/08/world/asia/08china.html?ref=world]. Their policy is very simple - you get caught with drugs, they send you to a minimum of two years in "rehabilitiation." Forget that what they call rehabilitiation looks, to the rest of the free world, very similar to a gulag [sorry former USSR]. Their policy may seem drastic at first glance, but there's a bright side to this. With the impending crash some are forecasting for China's economy [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/08/business/global/08chanos.html?ref=business], there could be a very viable win/win syndergy between China and the rest of the world.

If the US of A were smart, and it's a big "IF" we could work a good angle on this. Simply put, we could send them our Bernie Madoffs, and pay them what we would pay our own prison system to "rehabiliate" them at a discount. Because really - do we want our tax dollars being spent on taking care of former millionaires for the next twenty years? They could reap the brenefits of our nominal fee, as well as a great opportunity to brand themselves as green, good, and looking to the world's future. With a nice branding campaign - somthing along the lines of "China - keeping the world clean," or "China - rehabilitating the world...," they could take their good samaritan efforts, and make it real.

It's just a thought, but with the impending burst of China's economic bubble - who knows how far this could go to integrating them into the free world economy....

Tiger, a Little Tail, and the Marketing Beast | TalentZoo.com#comment_anchor

Great point of view on the entire celebrity debaucle.

Tiger, a Little Tail, and the Marketing Beast TalentZoo.com#comment_anchor

Branding 2010 - Make It Real

Well, Happy New Year everyone. For those of us who had our eyes even partially open, I think everyone can agree that in terms of branding, 2009 is a year best left alone. So much happened, and at the same time, so little.

It started off with one of the best brands of all coming alive - Barack Obama. Riding on a wave of much needed optimism, Barack led the county back into feeling good about the future. He was of course met with another brand. Perhaps not as strong, but definately one that has made itself just as memorable - Sarah Palin. Are we seeing the forces of good and evil play themselves out? Is this just some of the best staging anyone outside of Hollywood ever created? Whichever, way this goes, the Obama and Palin brands are sure to be in the forefront of our psyches for a long, long time.

After that, the brand of the United States of America was a strong contender for most notable. With it's financial markets crashing, it's real estate bottoming out, and it's moral fiber running thin, the US of A hit a low-point in terms of it's brand. Wait a minute - that might have happened in 2008. No, no, the first strike happened in 2008, but with the continued issues hitting like Katrina, Americans in all sectors realized that this was no '80s style recession, this was something far worse and far deeper. Everytime the world lost a brand like Pontiac, Kodachrome, Saturn, Max Factor, even Gourmet magazine - America took a hit. I wouln't even go into the Tiger Woods debaucle that ushered in the last month of the year, but it all showed the world just how vunerable a country and it's brand can be; if it's not protected and cared for. [Seriously, did your wife really chase you down the street swinging a gold club? Dude...]

On the bright side, 2009 brought us Twitter, a stronger Google, and a show that yes, even if our markets are bottoming out, we'll spend our children's legacy to bring them back. [really. Really? Yes, really] So I guess it does show us that if we're willing to spend enough, anything can happen. Are you listening Detroit? Oh, yes, you already did that....

So how about this? Let's just brand the old year as "2009 - Not what we anticipated..." As for the new year? As for 2010? How about this? Let's just try to protect the brands we love by making them real. If Ford wants to go green - great, we'll read it in your ads, but we'll wait for it to show up in your cars before the jump on the band wagon. If Burger King wants to go thin? Great - we'll believe you as soon as we see a burger with fewer than 1,000 calories. If Visa wants to be our partner, show us some interest rates that at least have a toe touching reality.

Let's brand 2010 with the tagline of "2010 - Make it real"