« November 2006 | Main | January 2007 »
In the Contra Costa Times, two headlines of the Business section caught my attention. The first said that Best Buy's sales weren't as high as they'd hoped, and that gift cards might promote more post-X-mas shopping. The other headline said that Amazon boomed during the holiday shopping season. Online is the place to be, it seems. Sales say so.
Advertising seems to be a hybrid of Journalism, Art, Multimedia, Psychology, Sociology, Geography, History, Business, PR, Marketing, and Statistics. So, another major was created for another job. But how many new types of jobs are created every year? How many majors actually work in their sole field? Very few, or so it's been said. Perhaps college should be where students learn interdisciplinary convergence instead of premature specialization; learn how to do many things, instead of just one.
Employers are looking for more than a GPA out of graduates, anyways. If resumes are a list of achievements and experiences, and two people with the same major and same grades have different chances of eployment, why do we even bother with a specific degree? Why not skip straight to achievements?
"It's crucial for 21st century education that kids are able to see how classwork relates to what's going on around them."
Building a New Student in Michigan
I consider Allen Hall Advertising to be a student group because it's a group of students. It's also an ad agency because it makes ads. It's also a mute because it doesn't speak up. We are what we do.
"Our beliefs determine our measurements."
- Einstein
If I write copy, I'm a copywriter.
If I coordinate, I'm a coordinator.
If I sit on my hands waiting, I'm a sitter.
If I bite people's ankles, I'm an ankle-biter.
If I achieve something, I'm an achiever.
If I criticize someone, I'm a criticizer.
If I learn from mistakes, I'm a learner. I'm also a mistake-maker (failure). But still an achiever.
Do titles describe action? Is the meaning in the title, or the responsibility it represents? Titles mean little compared to actions. In our little agency, they're destructive to work because they affect egos so greatly. If my title is Creative Director, people assume I don't know PR, business, or statistics. If I'd agreed to the PR Coordinator job for the student union, they would've assumed I didn't know art, creative writing, or design. Meanwhile, account directors are bossing around the creatives. Creatives don't have much to show for their time. What if telling someone to do something causes them to not want to do it?
Titles are unfair because they belittle those who are hampered by such narrow definition, and empowering to title-holders because they allow others to perceive only the title. What do we think of ourselves? Do our perceptions of ourselves fundamentally limit us from change? Do you think of yourself as a title? Does your title define who you are or what you do? Does it limit what you think you can do?
"If you think you can or you think you can't, you're probably right."
- On a wall in San Francisco
That said, responsibility seems to grant power. Feeling the weight of responsibility of a title can motivate a person to become more than they perceive themselves to be. The title can be an ego-boosting motivator. The flip side is a title's ego-stomping impotency. Heirarchies of title create inequality. Therefore, we are not equal. How is that in line with our ideals? For those in power, a title can be used to affect people's fundamental understanding of purpose, and therefore action. Titles are a powerful tool of motivation, but also of control.
Does it strike you that those who grasp for power are those who deserve it least?
So I've described what our agency is, students and ads. But what do we actually do? We mostly wait. Honestly, the people in it just wait to be told what to do. So we're a bunch of waiters. Most wait for instructions. Some wait for approval. Management waits for decisions to approve. So our agency consists of waiters, suggestors, and approvers. All that ends up happening is approving suggestions. That's what our agency does. It's a vicious political cycle that gets nothing done.
And we're only 40 college students. It works a little better in the Club Sports organization of thousands, but not by much. What about student government? The U.S. government?
I'd like to prove that it can be done. You know, change. I'd like to prove to myself that there is hope that the world can change by seeing it happen on a smaller scale (I considered 40 people a large-scale venture two months ago) and getting everyone to work together instead of against each other. We seem to be a microcosm of the human condition.
But how do we motivate people to do things? Not with titles. Being told what to do is belittling, no matter who it comes from. And if you belittle someone, doesn't that make you a belittler? If you gossip, are you therefore a gossip? If you stay quiet or speak up, what does that mean? For example, one person in the agency is afraid to speak up and ask questions because she doesn't want to slow down the work, but her comments would help get stuff done well. Another person keeps speaking up, but slows the work down because of it.
Without self-motivated action driven by clear purpose, the only tools we have are punishment and reward. At our agency, the sole punishment we have is to fire people. But it's a student group trying to learn a profession. It would be absurd to fire people because we're not engaging them. It's our own fault. On the other hand, what rewards do we have to offer? Money? No. Twinkies? Sometimes. The ideal reward is experience and a job offer after graduation, but everyone can get that simply by having "AHA" as a reference.
My reward is the work. I declined to be PR Coordinator for ASUO because the organization was bloated, beurocratic, and horrific. I chose advertising, I now realize, because it is the art of communication. We have good clients who are trying to do good things, and we're their only voice. I actually believe we can make a difference and change how the world is, whatever the scale. I've seen it done. History is proof of cause and effect. My plan:
"Suggestion approver" becomes "ad agency" becomes "voice of reason"
How far do you think we can get?
And think of how this applies to all business and relationships. Brand perception issues? Probably because of what the brand does or doesn't do. Poor perception of government? Same thing. Parents not connecting with their teens? Yep. People depressed because they don't know what to do? Probably because they've been told, not shown, what life could be. Or perhaps because they've seen what life is, and know too much. What do you think about it all?
Isn't traditional advertising simply giving titles to brands and ideas? What are we supposed to communicate if the brand takes no action, or poor action? What if the only action is to gain profit? What words do we use if there is no worthy action to describe?
It all comes back to show > tell.
Show the world what you've got. Because I'm doing that right now.
- Leary
Creative Director, Allen Hall Advertising.
PR Coordinator Aide, Associated Students of the UO.
Coordinator, UO Fencing Club.
Executive Board, UO Club Sports.
President, American School in London Improv Club. (8 people)
Mr. Windermere, Lady Windermere's Fan by Oscar Wilde.
Young 20's male caucasian, watches less than 5 hours of television per week.
Hopeless romantic, single, secretly enjoys relationship-driven plots.
Researcher, of people, trends, statistics, history, future.
Son, of parents in the Bay Area, SF.
Student, University of Oregon.
Conservative.
Liberal.
Revolutionary.
(Pick one.)
This I Believe - by Tom Peters ("tagged an Uber-Guru by Economist")
"Those who dwell on the "why I cant's" at age 16 will probably still be doing exactly the same thing at age 66"
There is a reason. There is always a reason.
More Stumbleupon gems:
"Sometimes I think war is God's way of teaching us geography."
--Paul Rodriguez
"I always wanted to be somebody, but I should have been more specific."
--Lily Tomlin
Musicovery.com - Massive Mind Maps of free music, further organized by energetic v calm and depressing v uplifting. The playlist is the track of music leading down a mood path you choose. Thousands, limitlessm, potential. It's beautiful. And free?!
Test Reaction Time - My best average after 3 tries was .204. Not sure what that means, but it's interesting how "startle" reaction time works so much better.
Gamer's Manifesto - Thank you, authors. Amen. These are more than consumer needs; these are consumer violent dreams. They exist for every interest:
"If
a [gaming] machine is so "advanced" it can draw a photo-realistic city in the
background of every level, that only means that developers now must to hire somebody to render that photorealistic city
instead of pasting on a bit of flat, blurred wallpaper. That means game
development costs are skyrocketing and that leads to the big-budget
Hollywood blockbuster syndrome. Bigger investments means developers
must "play it safe" for fear of losing their ass. And that means fewer
and fewer oddball "niche" games like those mentioned above and more
quickie knock-offs based on movies."
Why We're Miserable in the 21st Century - by David Wong
More than 40% of what you say in an e-mail is misunderstood.
There effectively is no "mass media" any more
so, whereas before we disagreed because we saw the same news and
interpreted it differently, now we disagree because we're seeing
completely different freaking news.
Stumbleupon.com is my new favorite hero.
Artistic Cyber Punk short films
Statues around the world
Free business Power-Point tutorials
Evolution of Gaming
Iraq Coalition Fatality Map
And millions more. . .
I can't ever sleep again.
Matt linked up to this guy's talk about ideas. A few days ago, Sam mentioned the book, The Perfect Pitch. How many ways are there to get new ideas out there? I'll have to read up on how to be heard.
"The only truths are beauty and impermanence."
- Director of Broken Saints
This is the future of comic books, raising the bar of storytelling and quality of content across all platforms of media.
I was looking at Google keyword popularity trends for Coke brand research. I found that "coke polar bear" hits were only in December, but general "polar bear" hits were only in April. Why was the Coke polar bear campaign so successful if polar bears have nothing to do with Christmas time?
Perhaps we link the following:
polar bear
cold
winter
group warmth
family
social harmony
Coke.
It makes intuitive sense, but why? How can we predict that Polar Bears and a sugary beverage could come together at all? There is no logical connection between polar bears and Coke, but the campaign is a massive success because it intuitively establishes that link. No amount of research can find the relevance of subconscious or associative thinking, and no amount of creativity can link irrelevant concepts.
"It's not conjecture. It's there."
- Creative writing Prof. Havazalet, concerning character decision-making.
But, numbers alone cannot determine relevance. For a silly example, there is an undeniable, negative correlation between searches for "War in Iraq" and "Ice Cream." Iraq inquiries grow in September, then vanish in June, when ice cream searches rise dramatically, then die down after August. Then Iraq searches swell again. Does Ben and Jerry's cause people to ignore the war? Maaaaybe. Does war cause people to dislike ice cream? Sometimes, sure, that makes sense. Or maybe the researcher had a brain freeze, and both are a result of people's summer pattern of life (they don't give a damn).
Numbers mean nothing without relevant context.
Q: So how do we find what's conceptually relevant?
A: Not by relying on interviews, focus groups and surveys.
Perception: Focus group Q & A's produce qualitative data.
Facts:
Insight: F.G.'s cannot be used as evidence for subjective decisions.
How Focus Groups Are Supposed to Work (article)
Why Focus Groups Don't Work (better article)
The conveyor belt of mass miscommunication and assumptions.
1. Use your own common sense to find out what's relevant. Your ability to link ideas is more than assumptions. Use associative thinking to craft the right questions.
2. Don't rely on assumptions. Get the evidence you need after determining the most and least relevant concepts. Dig, and dig deep.
Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking (book link)
Summary: People make instantaneous decisions subconsciously, but are then unable to accurately explain why they make them. Gut-level decisions are deep calculations of all known, relevant information, and often prove effective for those with experience in a profession or specific environment.
You can't predict how people will respond outside of focus groups, interviews, or surveys if all of your information was collected in focus groups, interviews, and surveys. If it's true that focus groups are basically worthless, then billions of dollars have been wasted as the result of relying on that kind of "data." But even business is superficial when considering history, politics, and world events.
The solution?
We have the internet and our own social networks; the qualitative information is already out there, and in its natural state of being. Check out the following, be skeptical, and compare all strengths and weaknesses of arguments and counterarguments:
Also, compare volume of traffic with reviewed ratings. For example, searching the worst reviews of a great novel reveals some funny stuff:
1 of 19 people found the following review helpful (1/5 stars):
"This book is boring!!!!!! I am three chapters into it..."
Which book? 
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
Well, maybe the people who review it worst, younger teenagers, shouldn't be its audience. Maybe the relevance of abusive relationships and racial tensions in American culture is too often lost on the youth we most desperately need to understand it. But nobody thinks that kids shouldn't read an American classic. Similarly, young people hate The Scarlet Letter
, probably because they were forced to read it before they understood its social relevance and the personal values at stake in their own lives. But who would believe me if I suggested schools shouldn't force good literature on kids who're too young to see past the language? Anyways,
Good luck!
(Since nobody else in the industry will believe you.)
