RSS
 

Archive for the ‘Thoughts’ Category

Ogilvy Talks Back

17 Feb 2006

Franky from Ogilvy made a few statements (one & two) on the blogstorm blog (in Dutch) about the setup of the Fanta campaign and the reason for the disrupted communication.

Apparently a server malfunction caused the long expected emails to disappear on their way to the blogstorm participants. Seems like a plausible explanation.

Franky learned some interesting things, and the fact he is blogging about them is actually the best he could ever do. At long last. It really doesn’t matter if you didn’t post items on your blog for a few months. It’s unconventional, true, but if you plan to do something with the blogosphere, the least you can do is go public and blog about it. That way, everybody has the same info and permanent access to it.

One remark. I still stick to my points about the shortcomings. The only thing I haven’t made clear enough is that it was very cool from Fanta to give it a try, despite the fact they apparently undermined the online strategy by releasing the product way too soon, or by starting the online campaign way too late compared to the exclusivity they offered the bloggers and the so-called advantage they provided in comparison with the ‘regular’ press.

Related:

How Ogilvy Missed The Point
How Ogilvy Screwed Up

 

How Ogilvy Screwed Up

13 Feb 2006

I haven’t got an official reply yet from Franky about the campaign for Fanta. He did reply on my other emails, the one I sent him with a URL to my blogpost, and the one in which I said he was welcome to inform me of any future actions.

Franky said he learned that he had to inform us (the Blogstorm core bloggers) sooner, saying there was another list of 5 bloggers that were meant to be informed of this campaign, a list I was mentioned on, and so were Maarten Schenk, Shoob , Peter Forret and Netlash . He said he regrets to have launched the online buzz on Friday, indicating that this would be the reason for the delay in information and follow-up. He pointed to his client, Fanta, and said that the official communication had some delays in it, causing his actions to be delayed too. I understood. I know corporate talks ’sometimes’ take time.

I was satisfied with his excuses and prepared to leave the matter for what it was. Even though it sounded like ‘impromptu crisis management and damage control’. I wanted to let it go, really. Until now.

Read the rest of this entry »

 

How Ogilvy Missed The Point

11 Feb 2006

Last year in July me and a dozen other bloggers were invited to Ogilvy’s Blogstorm. That was a pretty cool experience for a few reasons. First of all, it was great to see an advertising agency turning to bloggers to get input on ‘how’ to blog, ‘why’ to blog en ‘when’ to blog. Second, because they seemed to care about the ethics around it, about not getting burned and also because Ogilvy seemed to be preparing for some cool actions in which bloggers would become involved.

So, now we’re almost a year later and indeed, Ogilvy turned to ’some’ bloggers to have a package delivered with some Fanta products to be ‘tested’, with a small note included, inviting the blogger to ‘freely’ write about it (or not). I have a few things to remark about the way Ogilvy did this.

Read the rest of this entry »

 

Web 2.0 Overload

09 Feb 2006

I know I’ve been posting a lot on 2.0 applications lately. The reason for that is because I’ve been doing a lot of research on this matter for my work. I need to find handy and usefull applications I can integrate in an intranet website, to build a forum that can be accessed by all employees and where all the company data can be ‘alive’ and ‘interactive’. I’m talking pictures, RSS feeds, tagclouds, webmail, intranet pages, server pages, forum features, polls, idea pools, workgroups… all in one.

While I was checking out Ning, the interactive playground, I noticed how boring it had become. Ning is not a playground for 2.0 applications, it’s a prison where one surfer just copies the module from another and so on. Of the 5000 apps they say they have to offer, hundreds and hundreds just do exactly the same. It’s a circle. Nothing new is added, except by a few scripters who try their best, but then those apps become victim of the ‘me wantee’ society that lives there. Something I realized when I was walking around on the servers is that I can’t get my hands on source code to take the app out of that brainless adaptation environment to take it to the intranet and implement it there. Sure, Ning offers a blahblah.ning.com domain to host your brandnew copied app, and you can modify some tiny little details to ‘customize’ the thing you want, but users still have to go to the Ning site to ‘experience’. And that’s just too bad. I expected more from this. Then again, if the process is called ‘Clone this app’… that should’ve said enough.

While I’m a bit fed up now with useless 2.0 apps, I’ve realized that I’m not the only one. The 8by1 post I recently published had a comment in it by a blog called ‘Go Flock Yourself’. I had a great laugh, because this blog points out exactly what I refused to see in my enthusiasm. Here’s what they wrote about 8by1:

This is Web2.0’s take on those shitty, ineffectual electronic petitions. Browsing through the tag cloud on their front page, we see such poignant, world-visionary wishes as “Legalize Marijuana,” “End Smoking Bans,” “Cure Cancer,” the gem of goodwill “make all arabs leave the land of Isreal,” and a couple that are truly indicative of the mindset of the Web2.0 partisan: “hjhj” and “apple of by life.”

How Touching.

Relax, though, guys — at least this heap of fruity-smelling shit isn’t a beta. It’s in fucking alpha. Now let’s all join hands and lend our collective energy to solving the problems of world hunger and scratches on our iPod nanos.

And you know what? They’re absolutely right. Applications can be cool, I don’t deny that. But people always tend to use them for the same crap they’ve always used them for.

Take Social Bookmarking for example. There are people who open up accounts on each of those services to cross-post their bookmarks all over the place, thus hyping the importancy of what they bookmark.

You’ve got Digg, where links are dugg, and rated. People can comment on links, then bookmark the digg’ed link to a del.icio.us account. If it isn’t del.icio.us, it could be de.lirio.us. And if they don’t Digg it, they might Pligg it. If del.icio.us doesn’t do it, you can join jots, which does exactly the same but differently, of course. If the written text link isn’t enough and you want a fancy picture, you can try blogmarks, where a thumb of a screenshot is added to the bookmark. Or even better, try Wists, a free service that lets you visually bookmark any page on the web, then automatically create a small image, text summary and add a set of keywords without having to save and upload anything. They call it ‘Social Shopping’ to give the thing a name. But what’s in a name? Whether you Furl it, Spurl it or call it Connotea… it all does the same. And if you don’t want to share your links with others, you can always use looklater. Looklater also allows you to bookmark images, instead of ‘just’ links and pages. Then I haven’t even began to talk about BlinkList or Magnolia.

Isn’t it about time the cloning came to an end? Would somebody please kill the ‘yeah cool, me too’ thoughts that overcrowd the web 2.0? Thank you.

 

Google Talk Mirror

07 Feb 2006

Today, when I was at work, I downloaded and installed GTalk on my laptop. First thing I noticed was the message of the GTalk History 2 GMail, which I blogged earlier. Next thing I noticed was that gtalk.com actually is registered by Hasbro, the games & toys & youth electronics entertainment company. How weird. I thought Google was the owner of the dotcoms of all their products. Seems they aren’t.

Last remark I have to add is this: while I was at work, I logged in with my usual account and chatted throughout the afternoon while I was doing some research for a few projects at work. When I came back home just now, I noticed all the chat windows of the people I talked with were open, and I actually never signed out here, at home. I could see the entire conversation I had with each my chat buddies. Perhaps it is because the chat windows were still open, because one person I talked to wasn’t displayed here, only Nathan and Jason, and both windows of our previous conversation hadn’t been closed because we talked through the night and until I left for work.

Now this raises a few issues. Not only is my chat history being stored on two computers, my account allows double usage, or maybe even more. Compared to MSN or other chat clients, where you’re logged out when logging in on another device, this leaves the door open to some privacy issues I think. Agreed, I have to make sure I log out, but suppose the ‘remember me feature’ was clicked accidentally while logging in, that means someone else could remotely tune in and keep track of all my conversations, not by going through the chatlogs, but actually ‘live’ as they are happening.

I don’t know if it’s such a big deal. I just thought it was really weird to come home and see all the open IM windows with conversations I had with people while I was physically approximately 25km (15.5 miles) away, logged in on another PC and on another network. That kind of freaked me out a bit.

Here’s what you can do to simulate this: at home, open a few chat windows to buddies. Leave home, go elsewhere and log in again. Talk to the same people of whom you’ve left the chat windows open. You’ll see the result when you come back home, even if you’ve logged out on the second (remote) computer.

 

This Blog is Like Enron

31 Jan 2006

Either I pissed off Google, which is unlikely, or Chris Nolan’s tool is not working right and Eh List? no longer crawls Google to display results in a nice graph. Whatever it is,… it sure looks funny.

Google Rank 0

Google has indexed 0 of your pages (no change) with 0 back links (no change) to your site and 342 links from blogs (no change) as of 2 minutes ago

Hmm… weird. It must be something in Chris’s script. Nathan’s stats show it too.

On the side: Anybody knows how often Technorati updates ‘Rank’? Since the dip it took about a month ago, seems like nobody ‘new’ is linking to me lately, although in their search results I count at least 16 new blogs linking to this blog, in the last three days. (Thanks to all those blogs, by the way) It seems the Technorati tool only added two blogs in the last 20 days. How funky. 47 days ago I had 100 sites linking, whatever happened to them? Does anybody knows why Technorati actually is counting down? They removed cache? People unlinked? How does it work?

18,904 (674 links from 91 sites) as of 2 minutes ago
18,904 (674 links from 91 sites) as of 7 hours ago
18,966 (674 links from 91 sites) as of 2 days ago
18,859 (674 links from 91 sites) as of 5 days ago
18,744 (674 links from 91 sites) as of 7 days ago
19,045 (662 links from 90 sites) as of 9 days ago
19,064 (662 links from 90 sites) as of 12 days ago
19,147 (694 links from 89 sites) as of 19 days ago
17,756 (684 links from 93 sites) as of 21 days ago
17,323 (693 links from 94 sites) as of 26 days ago
17,281 (693 links from 94 sites) as of 28 days ago
16,961 (702 links from 95 sites) as of 33 days ago
16,637 (720 links from 96 sites) as of 35 days ago
16,242 (756 links from 97 sites) as of 40 days ago
15,608 (742 links from 99 sites) as of 42 days ago
15,162 (726 links from 100 sites) as of 47 days ago
17,374 (765 links from 92 sites) as of 54 days ago

Eh List? tracks some of my webstats since November last year. See all my stats and join in, it’s free.

 

Dear Google

29 Jan 2006

I’m disappointed in what you did. You, of all companies, should have set the example of ‘how to be independent and neutral’. I never thought you would give in to the claims of governments to hide information. What is there left now to be trusted if even search is being manipulated? How can I be ever sure that what you display to me as a result for the queries I’ve entered is real, complete and fully objective? Whenever I have to do research on delicate matters, how can I ever be sure I get to read the real pros and cons?

I always thought you guys would stand up for the freedom of speech and thoughts. You were the true example of a search engine that said things as they were. I’ve always been very pleased with the completeness of the information I got. I really thought this could last forever as the internet grew bigger, day after day. Apparently I was wrong. I appreciated it a lot you didn’t want to give in to the U.S. government like other companies have, in order to protect your users. Not that I have anything to hide, but because I thought it was just the right thing to do. Because I agreed that no government has the right to interfere with ’search’ in general. I was proud to be part of a Google community that stood up for its users. And now you’ve done the complete opposite of what you’ve always promised to do. These last days, information about your growing sneakyness and compliance to governments worldwide, in particular the Chinese, are piling up. What’s up with that? Where did you go wrong?

Read the rest of this entry »

 

Cory Doctorow vs DRM, Part II

26 Jan 2006

Continued from part I, this is the second part of Cory Doctorow’s 40-minute speech at the MUHKA in Antwerp, on Tuesday January 24th. Let’s tune in around the 20th minute.

“So let’s talk about DVB and CPCM works. DVB is a private industry consortium, it costs 10.000 Euros a year to be a member, you have to be either a manufacturer, or an academic, or a broadcaster or a film company to join. EFF is a member, my former employer is a member. We represent a manufacturer, an open source manufacturer called GNU Radio and the meetings are subject to a kind of non-disclosure agreement, so you can’t really talk about what’s said in the meetings until DVB decides to go public with it. This is essentially a secret law making process that’s under way there. Then when we’re talking about technical standards, it’s not such a big deal, but as soon as we’re talking about sweeping restrictions, changes to the way the copyright bargain works, it becomes very great indeed.

Warner Brothers, who were represented there – the representative from Warner Brothers is also the chairman of the compliance ad hoc group in the DVB/CPCM group- gave a presentation last year in March in Dublin at the DVB World Conference (.pdf, 138kb) in which they promised that they would see regulatory mandates across Europe, forcing CPCM, and these would mirror the regulatory mandates that forced the broadcast flag in America. This was a proposal that said: ‘people who build digital television technologies should first get the permission of the entertainment industry for all the features that these technologies would have. Now remeber in 1967 to 1984, the movie studios claimed that the VCR would put them out of business, and they sued and they lobbied very hard to get the VCR prevented from being introduced into the market. In fact in 1982, Jack Valenti the mouth piece for the Motion Picture Association went to a congressional hearing at UCLA, and said that the VCRs is to the American film industry as the Boston strangler is to women home alone, as a serial killer. And promised that this would be the death of his industry. And at his exit interview just a couple of years ago when he retired he said he never regretted a word of it, that he still believes that the VCR is dangerous to the entertainment industry and should be banned, and that the brand new motion picture association building in Washington D.C. is called the Jack Valenti building. This is not an industry that is in any position to tell us which feature should or shouldn’t be allowed in digital television.

Read the rest of this entry »