Recent reads -- Next Man Up

Next Man Up
John Feinstein

I didn't have a lot of hope on this one before I started but came away thinking this was probably one of the best football books I've read in a long time. Even better than my previous favorite -- Blind Side by Michael Lewis.

Feinstein does a great job describing how a NFL team works, through the 2004 season he spent with the Baltimore Ravens. Unlike other sports authors he keeps the game descriptions to a minimum. Thank you. There is nothing more boring or uninsightful than page after page of play by play descriptions. (Pat Conroy is famous for this in his basketball novels.)

In short it's basically a great description of how a NFL team works and how it makes personnel decisions throughout the year. It's a brutal sport and a brutal business that somehow many people find endearing.

Recent reads -- Naked Conversations

Naked Conversations
Robert Scoble and Shel Israel

I had heard about this book a while ago and have done a fair amount of research on the subject of corporate blogs so there wasn't much in here I had not already heard about. Reading it was more of an affirmation of what I believe, namely whatever you produce has to be authentic and written by someone with a passion for the subject. It can't be a corporate exercise.

I won't say much more since much of what's in the book has been discussed to death but two passages jumped out.

The first is a section on Kryptonite, the lock manufacturer, that faced a crisis when it was revealed on several blogs how someone could easily pick their well-known bike lock with a Bic pen. The authors point out that much damage was done through blogs and the company did little to monitor this and react. In the book the authors finally talk to Donna Tocci, PR manager for the company. Tocci explains, in the book, that she did try to get into the conversation and was "shouted down." She also found that bloggers were very passionate, opinionated and often got facts wrong. "They don't have to check facts or figures like traditional media," she said.

The authors just let this pass and never discussed it any further. Tocci brings up a good point that while it's good to engage with bloggers they can often be reckless and engaging with them can be a losing proposition. It would have been nice for the authors to jump in with some observations of their own on this matter.

The second section that jumped out involved Carly Fiorina's departure from HP. The authors note that no HP bloggers (HP employees who blog) had anything to say about it. Neither did any HP bloggers have anything to say about Fiorina's charges of gender discrimination leveled after she left the company.

Again, the authors just let this drop. I would have like to have known what those bloggers should have said. It seems to me in both instances there's not much to say, particularly if you are an employee of the company. Just because you have a blog it doesn't mean you need to use it all the time.

How to make sure the trains are running on time

A great example of the power of the community in staying up to date.

Last week I arrived at the local train station to discover chaos. The trains running into the city were delayed and nobody knew what was going on, particularly the station master. Yes, there were announcements over the PA but they basically told us that wires were down and no alternative transportation was being provided.

A minute later a gentleman starts reading updates off his BlackBerry. He read off some very detailed updates on what trains were running and when. All very helpful information. I asked him if was getting that off the Web site for the train authority. No. He was reading it off a mailing list generated by consumers.

So here we have a situation where the commuters, the customers, know more than the train authority. Even the station master was grateful for the information.

Thinking local

It's no secret that the one strength newspapers have, despite the online onslaught, is local ads. Even though classified are slipping away quickly, newspapers still have a local sales force that can sell to local businesses interested in reaching a local audience.

Well, even that advantage is slipping according to a piece in today's Wall Street Journal (Click here for full article.)

According to the piece by Emily Steel, local chains are hiring digital sales teams trying to catch up with Web-only enterprises that are quickly rushing ahead.

Here's a good summary of the problem:

Local media companies, because they are based in the communities they serve, would seem to have an edge over Internet sellers when it comes to persuading the diner or corner hardware store to take out an ad. But they have largely failed to convert that advantage into sales. Instead of tailoring their sales to local businesses, many newspaper companies initially focused on selling ads to bigger advertisers who were already buying space in their print products.

And the impact of that approach:

While this strategy allowed them to quickly and cheaply create a customer base for their online ventures, it also limited their growth, because they weren't expanding their customer base. Many newspapers also hurt themselves by simply plopping their papers online instead of creating new Web sites that offered advertisers something they couldn't get in print. Meanwhile, Web companies such as Google and Local.com are growing rapidly because they have made it cheap and easy for local companies to take out ads.

It's hard to have any sympathy for local newspapers anymore which seem intent on just watching the world pass them by.

So what happens if someone is out there?

I've never doubted there's life outside our solar system.

Instead, I've wondered how we define life and what would we do if we found some other "intelligent" being out there.

On the first point there's always been this assumption we need to find water to help sustain life. But that's assuming other life needs water or light for that matter. For a long time we assumed light was also critical but then found creatures in the deepest parts of the ocean thriving without access to light.

On the second point -- what do we do if we find life -- there seems to be someone else asking the same question. (See full article in Seed magazine.)

The article poses some interesting questions including -- who do we send these beings to if they want to talk to our leader? Also -- are we endangering ourselves by announcing our presence to others? Which leads me to believe we should just actively listen but keep our mouths shut.

The death of e-mail. - By Chad Lorenz - Slate Magazine

The death of e-mail. - By Chad Lorenz - Slate Magazine

The in box as your social network

Every time I sign up for a social network it scours my mail services (Google, Yahoo) for address and then matches them up with people already on the network. It's a clever way to grow interest and traffic quickly.

However, I've often wondered why the owners of the Inbox don't just create social networks since those email addresses seem to be the most important part of growing the network.

It seems Google and Yahoo have wondered the same thing. From Saul Hansell at the New York Times:

Web-based e-mail systems already contain much of what Facebook calls the social graph — the connections between people. That’s why the social networks offer to import the e-mail address books of new users to jump-start their list of friends. Yahoo and Google realize that they have this information and can use it to build their own services that connect people to their contacts.

More:

Yahoo Mail will also be extended to display other information about your friends as well. This can be a link to a profile page, and also what Yahoo calls “vitality” –- updated information much like the news feed on Facebook. There could also be simple features that are common on social networks, like displaying a list of friends whose birthdays are coming up.

“The exciting part is that a lot of this information already exists on our network, but it’s dormant,” Mr. (Brad) Garlinghouse said.

Full posting here.

The boiling frog

I had the chance to attend the Media and Money conference (link to conference site) last week. It's not part of my current world but was a chance to take a peek at my old world, for which I still have a great deal of fondness. However, I also harbor a great deal of frustration at how slowly "mainstream media" is changing. A few observations from sitting in the back rows with the bloggers.

Protection. Until recently I haven't really appreciated why these companies are so slow to change. It's because they have so much to protect. Only a tiny percentage of all advertising is online and cash flows at many big companies are still quite decent. It still doesn't excuse the snail-pace many are following but it explains this a bit better, at least to me.

All about content. Several of speakers pounded this home. Michael Eisner and Sumner Redstone were the most prominent. I think they're right (maybe I think that because that's my sweet spot) but I don't think it's just that. It's also all about the conveyance (channel) and the way it's delivered. Along with that comes credibility. And that's where many mainstream outlets suffer. Not because of Jayson Blair but because they're viewed as the establishment and not part of the leading edge.

Be afraid. I don't think enough are. Michael Schrage (bio) asked the people on his panel (James Brady, washingtonpost.com, Nora Ephron, Huffingtonpost.com, Susan Lyne, Martha Stewart, Susan Whiting, Nielsen Company) if they weren't the least bit concerned that Google (which professes to be a technology company, not a media company) had already figured out how to sell ads against content and make a damn good living at it. All the panelists said no, or something to that effect. Not the right answer in my opinion.

Don't ignore the techology. Several executives professed to not know very much about the technology now conveying content. Nora Ephron made several comments about how little she understood how blogs work other than her posting comments. Susan Lyne talked about seeing her child's Facebook account on occasion but not about joining Facebook or understanding it. (She did mention she viewed Facebook as a modern day Filofax. Interesting comment but I think it sells Facebook, and other social networking sites, short.) In short, if I were one of those executives I'd be diving head first into all these tools to get a better understanding of how this stuff works. The perception is already out there that many mainstream media types haven't a clue. (See example.)

Google won't hire me. Michael Wolff, Vanity Fair columnist, (news clips) made a great point during his session, The New Frontier in Media Investing. I am not sure if he was making a statement or a question but he wondered aloud if anyone on his panel (or at the conference) could be hired by Google today. Michael's answer was probably not. Call Google whatever you want but it is shaping the way we experience getting information and the fact that the most powerful people are not hireable by Google means something. It means these people better understand the new frontier and, more important, use it.

Other coverage:

paidContent.org
Silicon Alley Insider
Read/WriteWeb

Recent reads -- Focus on the Good Stuff

Focus on the Good Stuff
Mike Robbins

This was recommended by a neighbor who was the author's college roommate. I used to be enamored of these kinds of books (Don't Sweat the Small Stuff, etc.) but got a bit tired of them because they simply repeat what is painfully obvious.

Truth be told this one has the same challenges but I decided that the painfully obvious is something that we need to be reminded of all the time.

Much of the book concentrates on the value of your attitude but also the ability to be grateful for what you have. It also provides some interesting techniques for executing this on a daily basis.

The simple joys of simple technology, part II

Stumbled across Flightstats this week (in a roundup in the Wall Street Journal). It was ranked one of the best ways to track flight status. So I experimented with my Atlanta-New York flight, plugging in information two days ahead of time.

I can't complain much about it, other than all three alerts (two about slight delays leaving, one about arriving a few minutes late) were sent while I was in the air and thus unable to retrieve them. I suppose this is good for someone at home waiting for the flight to arrive (or a limo driver) but not necessarily for the passenger.

I did like the fact that it distinguishes between departure time (leaving the gate) and takeoff time (wheels up.) That's the first time I've seen that.

Overall, it's a pretty clever tool that I am going to try

Travels -- Atlanta

Truth be told, I didn't get to see much of it when I was there for three days this week. I can barely comment on the weather, other than what I saw out my window during countless PowerPoint presentations.

But one night we did journey to the new (relatively new) aquarium for dinner and a speech by Don Tapscott, author of Wikinomics, who is doing some work with us on collaboration. I'm already a big fan of his ideas and overall view and came out even more convinced that his views are dead on. And if they're not dead on, they are at least inspiring.

Recent reads -- I'm A Stranger Here Myself

I'm A Stranger Here Myself
Bill Bryson

I've become a big fan of Bryson's, simply because I wish I could write as well as he does. My sense of humor matches his and his books cause me to laugh out loud (called "laugh out loud funny" in book reviews.)

Here he reflects on America after being away for 20 years and while some of the humor is a bit obvious he does capture some of the quirks of America while also expressing great reverence. I would do no justice trying to replicate some of his humor here.

You can knock off this book in a plane ride.

Missed opportunity

Last week the New York Times had an interesting article (online version archived) about a new test being given to immigrants. In my view they missed a great opportunity to mix the online world with the print world.

Halfway through the article I wondered how hard this test could be. (In all honesty I kept chuckling to myself that it couldn't be that hard but the reality is that I probably wouldn't do as well as I thought I could.) The article had a sidebar with a few sample questions but only a few. Why not something online with a more complete collection of questions?

The New York Times is actually one of the more progressive publications in terms of online presence so I am reluctant to be too harsh in my criticism. But how hard can it be to exploit online's advantages -- interactivity and no limit on space?

The simple joys of simple technology

The purpose of technology (as I understand it) is to simply our lives and allows us to enjoy it more. As we all know, that's sadly not true.

However, I've discovered a new email reminder that lets me know when the wind is up near where I sail. It's from Sailflow and you can set it for certain wind levels. I set mine for 10 knots. I only started subscribing a few weeks ago so the opportunities to react have been few, until today. Around 1 p.m. I was resigned to watching college football and Notre Dame get their butts kicked yet again on a gorgeous late summer day with hardly a cloud in the sky. Then I got the alert shown above. Winds from the NNE at 12 knots. Perfect. I jumped out and out the door I went with my daughter. What a day, what a sail. And I am thankful for technology's role.

Recent reads -- Saturday Rules

Saturday Rules
Austin Murphy

I used to love college football and have only recently regained my interest due to my son's passion for it. Austin Murphy, who writes for Sports Illustrated as his day job, covers the 2006 season and focuses on a few key rivalries. It's a good read if you're passionate about college football and know the players.

There are several great interviews with various players and coaches but it's hindered by the fact that reporters just don't get the access they used to. Pete Carroll of USC seems to be the most open and provides some great color. But others, such as Lloyd Carr of Michigan, are not only very quiet but they don't allow their players to be interviewed. I guess they have good reasons for that but it can make for some dull coverage and in the end lets the writer guess what people are thinking.

Travels -- London

Was there for a day of meetings but arrived a day early to mingle and meet with several folks on assorted projects.

Lesson learned -- read the weather forecast ahead of time. Fall has arrived in London. I arrived and was not prepared and had a rather chilly 15-minute walk to the flat of a couple we know who transferred to London this fall. Had dinner at a local pub where I learned first hand they won't give you your check til you ask for it. In London I suppose they don't worry as much about turning over tables.

I was staying out at the airport, near where my meeting was scheduled, and decided to take the Tube to Paddington where I would hook up with the Heathrow Express. At that hour it probably would have been faster to cab but I was looking for some local color and that I got since the Circle line was down and had to take a rather circuitous route to get to Paddington where I picked up the Heathrow Express. Despite the hour-long ride, I am reminded how easier (and more advanced) other public transit systems are compared with my hometown, New York.

First, there are people (friendly ones at that) to answer questions. Second, the maps are clear and understandable. Third, I understand what is being said on the speakers. Fourth, it's clean.

Granted, I don't travel the subways much these days and the few times I have, I have noticed an improvement. Still, New York has a long way to go to catch up to other cities, London in particular.

One final note -- housing. My friends shared with me how much they're paying a three-bedroom flat that is 1,500 sq. ft. It's a nice place and appropriate for their family. The costs, though, left me speechless.

The last mile (or at least the last few feet)

I recall an article a while ago describing a situation at a daily newspaper. A reader kept calling to complain that his paper was ending up in a puddle and he couldn't read it. There was much annoyance at the reader in the newsroom until one executive (I think the publisher) finally explained that this matter was as important as all the good work being done writing and editing . Why, because from the reader's perspective all that journalism was worth nothing until the reader could read it. Thus, the newspaper should do everything it could to solve this problem and those in the newsroom have a stake in the matter.

I mention this because I just canceled my sub to a newspaper because of its erratic delivery schedule. I won't mention the paper's name but this has been a constant problem for an entire year. Meanwhile, I've read several trade articles about how this paper is attempting to increase circulation with all sorts of programs, mostly involving content and reader studies. As one who has made his living (sort of) off content I am certainly pleased they see the value in content and commend them. However, until they can understand the importance of getting the product on my doorstep by 7 a.m. all that is worthless.

Granted, the paper has an online edition which I can access but I (and others) still value the paper edition.

Perhaps this is all pointless since the paper version of newspapers is dying anyway. However, I mention this not just to vent (my main purpose) but to illustrate why newspapers (and other manufacturers) never seem to fully understand the customer experience. They spend millions on all sorts of studies, programs, CRM systems, you name it. But the root cause of their problem is they don't understand or experience the interface between the product and the customer.

Travels -- Santa Monica

Am here for our annual gathering. Great view and got a walking tour of Hollywood last night although I always wonder what people think of America when they seem something like Hollywood Boulevard which in many ways looks no different than any other street in America with tons of lights.

Highlight was Graumann's Chinese Theater. Tried to get good pics of the hand and foot prints but my camera was not up to it. This one is of Bob Hopes' square.

A pleasant experience at a government office (really)

Visiting government offices (motor vehicles, passport, etc.) is usually a trying affair and tests my patience to no end.

Today I got my passport renewed at the passport office in Norwalk and am still recovering from the experience.

I first visited the local library (Stamford) earlier this week and was greeted by a short line and a very helpful and pleasant woman who explained everything to me in plain English. I found out that since I travel overseas frequently and can't wait the usual four to six weeks for my passport to be returned I could make an appointment in Norwalk and pay an additional charge.

I called the reservation line and went through the automated process to book time. Normally such decision trees drive me insane. The decision tree for the passport reservation was intuitive and helpful and allowed me to book my time this morning.

I arrived at the office this morning to find plenty of parking, no long line and very helpful security guards. The whole process took about an hour, which is a reasonable amount of time, and everyone I encountered was pleasant and helped through the process. (On one form I had not filled in the right info, an infraction that in previous visits would have sent me to the back of the line with a stern warning. Today the omission was pointed out and fixed in 20 seconds.)

After I paid (with a debit card) I then was told when I would get the new passport (this weekend) and given a URL so I could track its status.

I'm speechless. I can think of countless for-profit institutions that could take lessons from the State Department.

Recent reads -- Mine's Bigger

Mine's Bigger
David A. Kaplan

A book about Tom Perkins' 289' boat, Maltese Falcon. (Link to yacht's Web page.)

Having visited the builder, Perini Navi, many times in Viareggio I was interested in this book and project for countless reasons. I remember seeing the first drawings of this around 2000 and wondering out loud not just about its length but the rig. I also interviewed Perkins for the New York Yacht Club newsletter when the boat was first launched and went for its first sail.

During my interview, and while reading the book, I was struck by several things:

1. The extraordinary amount of risk analysis that went into this. In short, Perkins wanted to make as sure as he could that his radical ideas would work and spent $10 million testing the hull and rig concepts. In the end it worked but he figured it was better spending $10 million and not building the boat than spending $120 million and creating a failure.
2. Perkins' ability to come up with some pretty extraordinary ideas and to get things done. Much is made of his ego but it strikes me that without someone like Perkins boats like this would never get built. Obviously without Perkins nobody would have bought such a boat. But it was his push and drive that got this done. He spotted the hull in Turkey and was the one who agreed the rig concept was worth trying. A boat builder, acting on its own, would not have created this idea.
3. The magnitude of forces. A boat this large is not just a design feat but an engineering feat. The forces on the rig and hull and come into play are beyond our comprehension. Lots of time is spent talking about Athena and Mirabella V, two comparable yachts, and the limitations they face on tacking and jibing. (For example, Mirabella can't jibe according to its insurance policy.)
4. How every one of these large boats has an incredible interior design that oftentimes proves impractical, if not unsafe. For example, the galley does not have gimbaled stoves and the author tells a story of flying across the head (called bathroom on these boats) and banging his head (as in the compartment that holds his brain) because of the beautiful, yet slick, marble floor. Along the same lines, I have also been amused at the arrogance of some designers who have no problem designing these dangerous features and then blaming the builder for not following instructions or, worse, not understanding that a sailboat heels when it sails. Part of a larger topic of how common sense seems to have taken a back seat on these boats.

Having said that, what was created is truly an amazing feat. Worth reading.

Travels -- Iceland

Was there this week for a meeting that included half North Americans and half Europeans. We thought this would be a good halfway point to meet since it's about 4 to 5 hours from NY and 3 from Europe.

We had mixed reaction to this unusual location for a one-day meeting but I am a big fan of new and different places. Others were less enthusiastic mainly due to airline schedules. (Our global meetings always have to reconcile the desire to be near an airport with frequent international flights -- Chicago, New York, London, Frankfurt -- and the desire to be in an inspiring, new location.)

Reykjavik certainly met the second desire although the one day we were there it was 50 degrees, cloudy, rainy and foggy. The map tells me the hotel we stayed at (Nordica) was near the water but I can't provide visual confirmation. I did hear the faint sound of a fog horn in the distance so I guess I can provide audio confirmation.

I had hoped to stay a few days but the second day of meetings got moved to London and I wanted to be back for the weekend. Some interesting lava and volcanic formations were spotted on the ride to the airport.

We also had some excitement while there: (Link to full article.)

Eight Russian military jets with the ability to carry far-reaching bombs, flew off Iceland’s south-southwestern coast yesterday without notifying Icelandic authorities. The jets also flew near Norway and Britain, where they were followed by local military jets.

Where to sit at your next meeting

I just came across this (rather late, I know) but it's in interesting look at the psychology of where people sit in meetings. It's from BusinessWeek and Aili McConnon. (Link to full article here.)

I am not sure how to run a good meeting but I do know what makes up a bad meeting, having attended countless ones.

A couple of insights:

• The boss (alpha) sits at the head of the table, facing the door to see who comes in first. (Nothing new there.)


• The yes-man (person) sits to his/her right.


• The yes-but person sits to the boss' left.


• The main opponent sits directly opposite the boss.


• The mediator sits in the middle.

What if you just want to fade away and not be noticed? Sit at the opposite end off the side or along the wall.

Vanities

I stumbled across this one -- an article from The Independent on how much effort some journalists put into making sure their entries on Wikipedia are up to date and not tampered with. (Link to full article here.)

Stephen Glover points out:

My impression is that some journalists think about little else than the on-line encyclopaedia. Are they in it? If so, is their entry being tampered with by hostile forces? If they are not included, why not? Should they in that case write their own entries, or will this little act of vanity be exposed in a gossip column?

With all that journalists have to worry about today (making a living, writing relevant material) interesting they would be spending their time doing this.

The numbers get worse

A nice summary of the challenges that continue to haunt the newspaper industry from Mark Potts. (Link to post here.)

Excerpts:

• Goldman Sachs sees "no encouraging signs" in July ad revenue figures.
• Bond-rating agency Fitch Ratings says the newspaper industry is doing worse than expected.
• Moody's cut its rating on the New York Times.

Does anyone see a pattern here?

Recent reads -- Wikinomics

Wikinomics
Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams

I'm a big fan of the concept and the book is basically an overview of how this works. If you're already sold on the idea, then I am not sure how much this book will help you.

While I am 100 percent convinced collaboration will work in some sectors (high tech for sure) I am less convinced about other sectors. And the book did not convince me that this will be a global phenomenon.

Two reasons:

1. There are some functions or sectors where sharing information is not in the best interest of the participants. Sales and recruiting come to mind right away.
2. Assuming you work in a sector where sharing information is OK, I still think we have a long way to go before people act this way. I agree it's the way to go, but people by nature are secretive and learn at an early age not to share (despite what our parents told us.)

It's also not clear to me how incentives will keep up. There are countless projects mentioned in the book where people go to huge lengths to collaborate. The response to Katrina is awe-inspiring. But in the normal course of business, people want compensation for their ideas. So any system that involves collaboration is going to have to have an equally innovative way to compensate people.

Update: I saw Don speak this week in Atlanta. Very compelling and interesting. Brings to life much of what is in his book. I am still skeptical about this idea working in every sector. (He used the example of the Boeing 787 being a collaborative effort, the same day Boeing announced a six-month delay in delivery due to issues with suppliers.) I also mentioned to Don the thought about compensation. My sense is that his examples, where people help others for only a fraction of the total benefit, will be exceptions. In the future the playing field will even out a bit. He agreed. Don also painted an interesting picture of why companies used to be closed -- transaction costs. Before the proliferation of information it was hard to find experts. Now it's easier to find them all over the world. There's less incentive to keep them on your payroll.

The real friendly skies

Yesterday's Wall Street Journal carried a front-page article on Capt. Denn Flanagan, a United pilot, who is very good at something we call customer service.

Some examples:

And when unaccompanied children are on his flights, he personally calls parents with reassuring updates. "I picked up the phone and he said, 'This is the captain from your son's flight,' " said Kenneth Klein, whose 12-year-old son was delayed by thunderstorms in Chicago last month on a trip from Los Angeles to see his grandfather in Toronto. "It was unbelievable. One of the big problems is kids sit on planes and no one tells you what's happening, and this was the exact opposite."

When pets travel in cargo compartments, the United Airlines veteran snaps
pictures of them with his cellphone camera, then shows owners that their animals
are on board. In the air, he has flight attendants raffle off 10% discount
coupons and unopened bottles of wine.

The examples go on and on. Pretty impressive stuff.

Thus, you have to ask yourself:

• What is it about Flanagan that makes him do this? I don't have stats but I'm guessing he represents 1 percent of commercial pilots.


• Why is that we are so amazed by this? The article in the Journal, written by Scott McCartney, has an almost "can you believe this?" tone to it. Shouldn't this be the norm?


• Most important, why is this something that happened from the bottom up? From what I've read, this has nothing to do with United and its management. Companies spend millions trying to crack the code on customer service and in the end it comes down to a few common sense ideas. Nothing more nothing less.

I'd be real interested in seeing how a company can duplicate this on a broader scale. And maybe I've answered my own question. If this is so amazing to us, maybe it's because it's so hard to do on a large scale.

Why newspapers are screwed

I saw this a while ago but only got around to posting something about it.

Since I'm not a numbers person and it's hard to argue with someone like Henry Blodget, who often knows what he's talking about, I was intrigued by his argument that newspapers, even if they shift over to the Web, are doomed. (Link to Blodget's full post here.)

In short:

• Content creation will remain too expensive.
• The bulk of advertising currently goes to the print product. and remains the most profitable part of the business. (Using The New York Times as example, 7.5 million online readers generate only 10 percent of the company's revenue.)
• Even if every newspaper were to shift online and printing/distribution costs were eliminated the bulk of ads would dissipate onto other non-newspapers sites -- eBay, Yahoo, etc.

OK, it's hard to argue with the numbers but I'm still convinced that those who can create compelling, relevant content in a way people find usable will find great success. Perhaps not the degree they did before but there will always be a need for information and people willing to fund some part of it (the info itself or access to the eyeballs.)

Remembering less

I have this theory that with the ubiquity of data it's hard to remember most of it. At least that applies to me.

I find that I come across a lot of good information but because I know I can look it up in the cloud I don't exert myself much and in the end forget the data and forget where to find it. (You can only bookmark so much.)

Stephen Baker's recent post on BusinessWeek.com made me realize I may not be the only one. (Link to full post here.) An excerpt:

Our machines these days maintain and transmit most of our numbers. We don't need to memorize many of them anymore. But since we do still maintain memory capability in our brains, even if it's vestigial, which numbers should we store up there? I'd say a phone number is a good start. People ask for it occasionally. Forms demand it. Social security number would be useful too. Maybe we'll work on that one today.

Sharing secrets

For the past several months I've been dabbling with Facebook, mostly to just better understand it.

One thing that has struck me is the platform and the ease of sharing information. Thus, I've wondered aloud why this, or something similar, couldn't be used inside corporate firewalls among groups of people who need to share information.

The U.S. government apparently agrees.

The Director of National Intelligence, in December, will open up something called A-Space, basically a Facebook or My Space for spies. (Link to Financial Times article here.)

An excerpt:

Thomas Fingar, the deputy director of national intelligence for analysis, believes the common workspace – a kind of “MySpace for analysts” – will generate better analysis by breaking down firewalls across the traditionally stove-piped intelligence community. He says the technology can also help process increasing amounts of information where the number of analysts is limited.

Interesting, to say the least, that spies would want to share more info. But that's the point. Here's an opportunity for a community (the U.S. intelligence community) that needs to better share info to do just that.

Recent reads -- Notes from a Small Island

Notes from A Small Island
Bill Bryson

I am becoming more and more enchanted with his books. I am not big on travel books but Bryson's sense of humor is contagious. He's one of the writers I wish I could be like. And not just because he travels and gets paid for it. But his way of describing things is impressive.

Finding local gas prices

There's an example I constantly use when people ask me how local newspapers could improve. In short, I tell people that local newspapers could publish more, get this, local news. And it should be something they're truly interested in. And it should be something that they can post in print and online. And the online version can be open so people can contribute and participate. The specific example I use is gas prices. There's something everyone in town cares about. Print a list on the front page every morning based on whatever was on line the night before at 11 p.m.

Well, time to forget that. Too late. Google has just figured it out. I just noticed the new My Maps feature on Google Maps. (Link to Google Maps.) Under the "add content" feature you can overlay all sorts of information from housing prices to, yup, local gas prices. The gas prices are supplied by Gas Buddy (link to Gas Buddy here) and they overlay a map of my neighborhood.

The other feature is "create new map" which allows you to customize a map with specific information (pizza parlors, places to visit, maybe even gas stations with cheap gas.)

No more bullets, please

goFirst off, I have a great admiration for those who are effective communicators, particularly those who can stand up and present to a group of people. I have long thought that if you can do that (while also having something interesting to say) you would have a great chance of success.

That's why I am particularly fascinated by PowerPoint and its misuse. The fundamental problem with PowerPoint is that people underestimate how effective they can be. Instead, many people make PowerPoint the show and make themselves and added thought.

Seth Godin recently rehashed an old post which brings up some sensible guidelines. (Click here for full post.)

Some helpful excerpts from Seth:

• No more than six words on a slide. EVER. There is no presentation so complex that this rule needs to be broken.
• No cheesy images. Use professional stock photo images.
• No dissolves, spins or other transitions.
• Sound effects can be used a few times per presentation, but never use the sound effects that are built in to the program. Instead, rip sounds and music from CDs and leverage the Proustian effect this can have. If people start bouncing up and down to the Grateful Dead, you’ve kept them from falling asleep, and you’ve reminded them that this isn’t a typical meeting you’re running.
• Don’t hand out print-outs of your slides. They don’t work without you there.

... and the sun sets in the West

Here's one of those news stories that just amazes me. Seems it has taken a study at Harvard to come to the conclusion that news organizations are threatened by the Web. (Link to full story here.) I kid you not. Here's the actual headline: "Web threatens traditional news organizations."

It gets better. Here's the lede:

The Internet is a threat to traditional news organizations, which no longer have
the advantage of being the first to report breaking news online, according to a Harvard University study released yesterday.

Aside from a few stats (which show readership of newspapers declining) this is something you could have seen in 1995.

Show me an article about what newspapers are doing about this and that would be news.

Space tourism

A recent article on Business 2.0 jumped out at me. It's a short profile of Jim Benson, founder of SpaceDev, a company that wants to send tourists into space. (Link to full article here.)

I think there's a lot to all this and it will eventually happen but the reason that it jumped out is the fact that this is virtually the same story that was written by some writer eight years ago. (Link to full article here.)

I have no doubt space tourism will take off. Amazing, though, that in eight years it hasn't really progressed much while in eight years in the 60s the race to the moon was announced by President Kennedy (1961) and accomplished (1969.)

One case where the government actually did something efficiently.

Is it really possible to be objective?

A recent post (maybe more of a rant) by Alan Meckler of Jupitermedia over how his company is portrayed on Wikipedia reminds me that I've long thought that it's almost impossible to be objective. (Link to post here.)

Alan's beef is that the entry is innaccurate. I have no way of judging if he's right or not, nor do I really care. But it seems that every institution that tries to be "objective" from the New York Times to Wikipedia needs to realize that anything a human writes is by definition not objective. Just providing both sides of the story and trying to stick to facts is not enough. Because in the end it depends on what facts you include, in what context they're portrayed.

In the case of Jupitermedia Alan is taking offense at some controversy he says never occurred:

Then read the next controversy. There is reference to something about social networking at JupiterResearch. First of all we do not own JupiterResearch anymore and secondly as far as I am aware there was never a controversy about social networking, JupiterResearch and Jupitermedia. Clearly whomever added this "controversy" was promoting a book or service or something that has nothing to do with facts or history.

Alan is objecting to something he's not "aware" of. Thus, this controversy probably could have happened. Or it could have been important to the writer, but not the company. Might it just be better to admit the article aspires to be objective but the reality is it isn't?

I am beginning to realize that what I call "point of view journalism", something The Economist is excellent at, is the wave of the future. Because there is so much media out there most consumers of mainstream media already come in with a perspective (bias?) to begin with and nothing is going to change their mind. (If someone thinks the New York Times is liberal, it's pretty certain they will feel that way not matter what the paper write. Same goes for Fox News and its perceived conservative slant.)

Travels -- Maine

Off on a four-day weekend to Maine. Have not been here in a looong time but used to come her frequently in a previous job. Heading to Monhegan Island tomorrow. Visited it once, about 15 years ago, and am looking forward to a return visit. Not sure I could live there, but visiting is sure inspiring.

Please, don't call or write

I've long contended that most customer hotlines and online help tools are not there for the benefit of the consumer. Instead, they are barriers used to ward off pesky customers who take up a company's time.

Today's New York Times carries a piece on Netflix and their decision to have all queries go to a call center where they reach a live person. (Link to full article, registration required.)

Ms. Funk is one of 200 customer service representatives at the Netflix call center here, 20 miles west of Portland, where she is on the front lines of the online movie rental company’s efforts to use customer service as a strategic weapon against Blockbuster’s similar DVD-mailing service.

If companies really wanted to help customers they would make it easier, not harder, to get help. This decision by Netflix is acknowledgement that customers prefer a voice, not automation. And I truly hope it works out for them and increases customer loyalty. (The topic of getting to a voice, through all the decision trees, is the subject of another discussion.)

I know there are those who have numbers proving how costly a call center can be but I truly believe that companies don't understand how they can increase customer loyalty by making all this easier and friendlier. (As an experiment, trying finding the customer service number on a company's Web site. In most cases you will find it buried.)

I can't talk now

I am always a bit amused when I read a profile of an editor who refuses to speak to the reporter or only answers in an email.

From Michael Calderone's New York Observer profile of Portfolio and Joanne Lipman: (Link to full article.)

Ms. Lipman would only respond to questions by e-mailing a statement, which presented the Roth piece ..."

This strikes me odd for several reasons:

1. Editors/reporters are always asking others to be quoted but when it is asked of them they are reluctant. Seems a bit hypocritical.
2. By not answering the questions in person the editor/reporter is basically acknowledging that it's pretty scary being on the other end of the reporter's notebook.

I remember the first time I was interviewed by a newspaper reporter after working on newspapers for many years. What I thought I said and what appeared in print were vastly different. Stupid me for not being smarter.

Thus, I commend those who are rightfully cautious. But at the same time don't ask of others what you won't do yourself.

Obits, death notices, whatever

Mark Thompson sent a note to Romenesko recently commenting on the definition of an obituary. He took umbrage at someone calling a "paid obituary" an "obituary." A brief excerpt:

As newspapers have stopped producing obituaries, they have begun soliciting faux articles written by the deceased relatives or the funeral home. These are not cheap; I recall a relative's "obituary" that recently ran in the Providence Journal for the tidy sum of $700 (only could people on the business side be so stupid as to wring money from those in mourning and then wonder why they are falling in public esteem). However, these should not be called obituaries. They are ads, plain a simple. They generally don't include less savory aspects of a person's past -- a divorce, for example -- and are crafted by the sensibilities of the survivors.

(Link to full letter.)

I recall many nights on the desk fighting with survivors over the details of the "obituary". Most didn't want to give the cause of death and most wanted to control what was said and also review the content. I used to think it was important to fight for that information for the general good of the republic even if it meant pissing off a reader or two.

In recent years I've changed my mind. "Paid obituaries" or whatever you want to call them are not a scam to "wring" money from bereaved survivors. Instead, it's a chance to those to control what is most certainly the only article ever written about their loved one. It's a chance to show some respect and decency. It's also a chance to charge someone for something I think they probably find worthwhile, especially if they can control what is said about their dearly departed. Would it better to have an objective piece on the person, warts and all? Sure, but weighed against further alienating an alienated reading public then I think not.

I also have a sneaking suspicion readers don't know the difference and if they did, couldn't care less. Another case of reporters fighting for readers' rights that the readers don't necessarily want.

I say all this referring mainly to small and medium size papers. Giants such as the NY Times, Washington Post, etc. can still afford to practice the art of writing obits, something I have great respect for. But the majority of papers would benefit from charging for obits.

Outsourcing newspaper production

News from New Zealand that the New Zealand Herald has begun outsourcing its editorial production. (Full story here.)

I've often wondered why newspapers owned their own printing presses but this move was inevitable. There will be the usual outcry from traditionalists but I'd be shocked if more people didn't follow this model.

A chance to comment on the news

The news that Google will start to allow sources in news articles to comment on the final article has yielded all sorts of comments, most about how this is potentially going to harm the integrity of the articles. (Other commentators wonder if Google really knows what it's getting itself into arbitrating disputes and verifying the identify of those who claim they've been misquoted.)

Be that as it may, it's in my view a commentary on how the world feels it has been treated by the media. Traditionally it's been very hard for those quoted in articles to set the record straight. (I am not talking about disagreements over the intent of the story but over basic facts. The former is something that will always happen.)

Now quoted sources have a chance to publish their comments (supposedly unedited) for the world to judge for themselves.

Until now someone who felt they had been wronged had to contact the publication and convince a defensive editor that the reporter had erred. It usually ended with no resolution. If pushed, the newspaper would print a correction or would tell the aggrieved party to write a letter to the editor, which most times got heavily edited.

In several previous jobs I recall the editor resisting as much as possible the idea to print a correction. (This attitude, thankfully, has changed a bit, thanks in part to ombudsmen.) The New York Times seems to be one of the few exceptions. I also recall several discussions where someone suggested we randomly call subjects in stories to see how they viewed the end product. It was alway dismissed as "not cost effective." Translation -- they weren't interested in finding out.

In addition, it's been my experience that many wronged people who just don't bring up the subject knowing it will not lead to anything positive. (A fellow church member commented how the local paper quoted him and got all the facts wrong. I said I knew the reporter and was sure it was unintentional and that he should call the editor. "What's the point? he answered. "They'll just keep screwing it up.")

Google's experiment encourages more people to bring up corrections knowing the original party is not involved in the discussion and also knowing it will be seen by a much wider audience, the Web audience.

Newspapers, in my experience, have been very reluctant to correct what they term "minor" errors (spelling, title, etc.) but they need to realize it's those little things that set the tone. Errors there make the reader wonder how credible the rest of the report must be.

So you can't help wonder how much newspapers brought this upon themselves.

Update: Kara Swisher seems to agree. (Link to her post.)

Update: Paul Gillin has a similar take on this with an interesting perspective: (Link to post.)

Today, we have a new model. If someone interviews me for a story, I can post my version of the interview on my blog or publish an audio recording. I also think it's reasonable to ask the publication to link back to my comments or recording. After all, neither of us has anything to hide, right? This new approach to reporting would reduce the chance of error and provide readers with the option of reading a more detailed version of the information presented in the story.

Where the good content can be found

I was talking to a reporter from a well-known paper last week and he commented how most of his interesting material goes into this blog, not the paper. I've noticed, too, that most of the interesting reading I come across is on newspaper blogs.

Most of the material I read in a newspaper today is either out of date or does not offer an interesting perspective or angle. However, the material I read on newspaper blogs seems far more interesting.

This reporter commented the material for the blog was decided for him. It was whatever the editor rejected. Which leads me to wonder if some newspapers are so stuck in the past and formula writing they are missing a great opportunity for great content.

Having said that, here's an interesting report from Henry Blodgett about why, even with a strong online presence, many newspapers will still falter:

Put differently, the big problem for newspapers right now is not readers--it's revenue. A "unique user" online generates a fraction of the revenue and profit that a newspaper subscriber or reader does offline. Although the value of a unique user will continue to rise as advertising dollars flow online, it will almost certainly never approach the value that newspapers generate offline (in part because so many of the dollars spent in offline papers are wasted).

$1 million a week?

A posting from TechCrunch on layoffs at the San Francisco Chronicle. Nothing new there. What caught my eye is the amount of money the paper is losing a week. They point out:

The paper that is losing $1 million per week could fire every journalist it has on staff and still not break even. But that hasn’t stopped them from trying. 80 reporters, photographers and copy editors plus 20 in management will be gone by end of summer.

Fogey

I've been dabbling with Facebook for the past month or so and have found out that, at least in the view of BusinessWeek, I'm a fogey.

Seems that other people my age have discovered the site and its ability to connect people, according to BusinessWeek:

Lately, an influx of older users—professionals their 30s and 40s, many in high-tech is changing the face of Facebook. Among Silicon Valley executives, journalists, and publicists, Facebook has become the place to see and be seen. And it's not just tech. Consulting company Ernst & Young's Facebook network boasts 16,000 members, Citigroup's (C) claims nearly 8,500.

Having also checked out LinkedIn and Plaxo I have say I am starting to understand its appeal. The interface makes updating easy (and addictive.) Right now most of what I do has nothing to do with business but am seeing its potential.

The spike in attention was also prompted by Caroline Giuliani's recent episode with Facebook. Katie Couric also weighs in with a post from one of her interns. (If Katie Couric is on to this then maybe it is old news.) He outlines several of the key rules to Facebooking:

- Never become friends with someone you don’t know. (For example, I really wanted to become friends with Howard Kurtz, but did not. I thought it would be awkward since we have never met.) For the uninitiated: becoming someone’s friend means that there is a little icon on your other friend's profile that shows you two are buds.
- Don't friend someone the second you meet them. Wait a few days, because you don’t want to seem too eager. Chill.
- Never poke anyone. What does “to poke” mean? Don’t worry about it, just don’t do it.
- Don't become friends with your mom or any of her friends. Do I need to explain more?

Recent reads -- Never Eat Alone

Never Eat Alone
Keith Ferrazzi

One-word summary -- network. And then network some more.

To be fair (sort of) Keith has made a career of this and has some good tactical advice for those of us (myself the prime example) who like to stand in the corner alone.

Key points:

1. Don't keep score. It's about helping others. You will benefit in the end but don't look for immediate (or even long term) payback.
2. Be the connector between networks. We all have groups we are part of. That's easy. The real power comes from introducing those two groups.
3. Stretch. It never hurts to try to reach high to meet with people you think would never want to associate with you.
4. Be yourself. Nothing is worse than coming across as an opportunist.

Clear thinking

One of the better pieces I've read recently is the deconstruction of a Deloitte memo. The article, by Lucy Kellaway of the Financial Times, is one of the best critiques I've seen in a long time as well as quite biting.

In her piece she compares the Deloitte memo, written by Jim Quigley, with one written by David Greer, deputy chief executive of Royal Dutch Shell's Sakhalin Energy Investment Company.

Now consider the style of the Deloitte memo. "Our identity reinforces the shared vision of our member firms," it says. This is so profoundly meaningless that I doubt if its author could tell me what he meant by it.

The next criterion is that the boss must sound as if he is on the same planet as the people he is trying to motivate. Again, high marks to Greer. He refers to "mutterings" and bad body language of staff at a recent meeting. In other words, he is aware that morale is bad and isn't frightened to discuss it.

Meanwhile, at Deloitte the new chief is oozing platitudes as to the state of the company. "I have never been more proud of who we are?.?.?. we strengthen our brand every day as we deliver value to our clients."

Next, a good motivational message must consider what it is that keeps employees in their jobs. Greer cites three reasons: "To earn a decent living for yourself and your loved ones," self-respect and desire for success. This had me cheering (even though the phrase "loved ones" is not one of my favourites). Most managers like to believe that workers are there for love of the company or, worse, for passion towards the brand. Money and other basics tend to get overlooked.

Ouch.

Magazine subs -- an experiment

I get about 10 magazines in the office, most of them related to business.

I have decided to let most of the subs run out for two reasons:

1. I am able to track most of the content online through Google Reader. Since I don't read most of the articles (I just skim to see if there's something I should be aware of) the Reader seems to serve its purpose. The only exceptions are The Economist and The New Yorker. Both, in view, are best consumed in print. Their lengthy articles don't translate well online.

2. I can't keep track of when the subs really expire. This has been going on for years and drives me nuts. I sometimes get renewal notices a year ahead of the expiration date. I finally started tracking expiration dates but seems like a lot of work for something so unimportant. I also don't like the few magazines that offer (is "offer" the right word?) automatic renewal. Feels like a runaway train -- something I have no control over.

As someone who has worked in the magazine industry it saddens me (a little) to do this but it's been a long time coming.

Update: I recently stumbled across this post from Chris Anderson, author of The Long Tail and editor Wired. He makes the same point but far more convincingly and with more evidence. (Click here for post.)

Travels -- SF/Palo Alto

Am on the West Coast for two days. (Palo Alto today.) I was told by the boys to get some anti-Bonds posters but I had to explain that this is pro-Bonds country. I need to go to LA to get that stuff.

I did have an offer to go sailing yesterday but balked due to work commitments. What's the matter with me?

Also noticed the early rush hour. Was out for a 430 walk (jet lag) and astounded by the traffic. Everyone getting up early to meet the East Coast market openings

Remembering Chet Currier

I was sorry to hear the news of his passing. He was an "old time" journalist who understood the new world. Most important, he was a kind and generous friend.

I first met him many, many years ago at AP. I was visiting Mark Potts, a former colleague from our college paper. Mark was banging out market reports and Chet was doing the crossword puzzle in between flurries of activity.

Recently our paths reconnected through our church. His wife, Carol, also taught at our children's school. He moved out to California to help Carol take care of her mother. While out there he stayed with Bloomberg.

Chet understood what it meant to create unique and interesting content with disregard to the medium. He understood the world was changing but one thing didn't -- good articles.

I'll miss him.

Here's the announcement from Bloomberg:

It is with great sadness that we announce the passing of Chet Currier. Chet joined Bloomberg in 1999 and was known by his colleagues as a reporter with thorough knowledge of the financial world and a commitment to accurate, clear and concise journalism. As a columnist who wrote a twice-weekly column on mutual funds and personal investing, he often took contrarian positions and gracefully showed investors how conventional wisdom was often wrong. After a 37-year journalism career, including 29 years at the Associated Press, Chet will be greatly missed by his co-workers and the millions of readers familiar with his byline.

From Jon Friedman:

WEDNESDAY PET PEEVE: It's a shame that the public doesn't get to know the people behind the bylines. Chet Currier, 62, who died this week, was someone you would have wanted to hang out with. A dedicated stock-market and investing writer for decades, he was also a mentor. Chet, who worked for the Associated Press for 29 years, always encouraged colleagues and counterparts alike. I wish there were more Chet Curriers.

Here's a collection of articles on Chet:

CNBC -- Peter Schacknow
Jim Kingsland

For those on the East Coast, services are August 25 at Noroton Presbyterian Church at 11 a.m.

Outlets, where are the outlets?

Is it my imagination is there a decrease in power outlets at airports? Not having the advantage of using the airline lounge today I spent the past 30 minutes scurrying around Kennedy Airport looking for power for my laptop.

When I did find a rare one there was a rather large crowd plugging in. Seems airports would find it worth their time to add a few more outlets.

Maybe it's a conspiracy by the airlines to force people to join their lounges.

Travels -- London

Am here for two days (long by my standards.) Amazing amount of rain, even for London standards. Tons of flooding outside the city. Did watch darts and cricket on TV to expand my sports horizon.

Was pleased to drive by Buckingham Palace and learn the Queen was home because the Royal Standard was flying.

Recent reads -- The New Rules of Marketing and PR

The New Rules of Marketing and PR: How to Use News Releases, Blogs, Podcasting, Viral Marketing and Online Media to Reach Buyers Directly
David Scott

Kind of a lengthy title but the main point -- it's about something I've heard called conversational marketing. I am sure there are countless other ways to describe this but it's all about creating content and information that people want to read about.

A few key takeaways:

You need to create content that exists somewhere for people to find. That way, when someone is interested, they will find you.

Pushing out content is only ideal if extremely targeted. Sending press releases is not the way to do this, unless you know your audience is interested.

You need to start the conversation without selling. Making a pitch lessens your credibility.

People appreciate a certain degree of objectivity.

Making money off social networking

The phrase I always despised was "monetize." It was used to describe how someone would make money off tons of online traffic.

Kara Swisher has an interesting look at all this with a visit to Facebook. I've become more interested in how Facebook connects people but am still not sure how it's going to become a business. It's true it attracts a lot of eyeballs but now what?

Am hoping it succeeds but not sure how.

Making money off social networking

The phrase I always despised was "monetize." It was used to describe how someone would make money off tons of online traffic.

Kara Swisher has an interesting look at all this with a visit to Facebook. I've become more interested in how Facebook connects people but am still not sure how it's going to become a business. It's true it attracts a lot of eyeballs but now what?

Am hoping it succeeds but not sure how.

Going local

The Washington Post's announcement that it will create a separate site to cover Loudoun County is one of the first encouraging bits of news I've seen in a while. (Somehow, the phrase "hyper local" has been applied to this trend.)

This is the result of Rob Curley's creative mind and is something smart newspaper executives will follow. The Internet has always been about local.

The difference between this effort, and others, is that there's a staff dedicated to gathering news and info. Other efforts have hoped (prayed?) that users would contribute content. They will. But only if there's a solid foundation to build on.

Another smart aspect -- creation of databases. There's countless opportunities at a local level: gas prices, church schedules, lunch menus. You name it. Communities live off this stuff.
This effort will be interesting to watch.

Update: Richard Waters has an interesting perspective on how this will work. Most important, he wonders how many other big media companies are thinking this way. My guess is few.

Man the lifeboats

One of those stories that I no longer consider news: Newspapers' Ad SalesShow Accelerating Drop

Total print and online ad revenue was down 4.8% to $10.6 billion in the first
quarter from a year earlier, according to the Newspaper Association of America,
compared with its full-year decline in 2006 of 0.3%.

Mark Potts has a good summary and comments.

Travels -- Michigan City, Indiana

Stopped here for a few hours to visit friends. Had stayed here two years ago on the way back from Mac and enjoyed the Indiana dunes far more than I thought I would. (Part of the problem growing up in the Northeast is you think the beaches and waterfront is second to none.)

Very casual, low key. No pretension. Just what I like.

Staying connected

There seems to be a flurry of activity on the several sites I am part of. Not sure if it's increased awareness on my part or if the owners of the sites -- LinkedIn, Plaxo, Facebook -- have figured out to if not make the sites more useful, at least promote them better.

Take LinkedIn, for example. Seems everytime I go on there the home page has some very clever teasers. By examining my profile they can suggest people from my past. This is, what I believe, is driving an increase in requests from others. (It's certainly not my personality not my value as a member of their network.)

The problem is I now have profiles on all three sites and it's hard to keep things up to date. This is particularly true between the directory sites, LinkedIn and Plaxo. Although, I notice you can, for a fee, synchronize the two. Nice feature. But I still have LotusNotes at work so I am now dealing with more than one contact list. (The fact that I have LotusNotes is probably more my problem than LinkedIn's or Plaxo's. LotusNotes has such small market share it's a wonder anyone collaborates with them.)

My main beef with LinkedIn is that I don't really use it, other than as a scoreboard to see how many people I have listed. I am up to 66 but there are others in my network above 500. Damn. I've got to get to work. I have also done some mother in law research and seems many people have the same opinion I do. Mark Potts goes a step further and claims the whole thing is a waste of time.

I am not sure it's a complete waste of time but a few thoughts:

One of these models is going to take off. Seems the one that will is the one that connects the others the best. All have realized they need to talk to each other.

I see young people living and breathing by this stuff, particularly on Facebook. I am not crystal clear how this will impact my life but it's impacted others.

I actually like the Plaxo model -- relying on people to update their own contact info. Others think it's an intrusion. I don't agree but realize one must be careful how often you ask for updates. Once a year seems about right.

Mahalo

I've decided to not just watch the Web 2.0 world (however it's defined) but also to be an active participant.

I've signed up to be a PTG (part time guide) for the new Mahalo. In short, I will be trying to create pages of links on various subjects. I certainly won't get rich at this but I am interested mostly in how it works.

Am on vacation so no time to create some pages but I got many pages of instruction and my inbox is already swamped with threads of conversations on various matters. I have some plane time ahead of me. That will be a good time to digest all this. Will keep you posted.

Recent reads -- A Walk in the Woods

A Walk in the Woods
Bill Bryson

My favorite summer reading so far. The first half will make you want to walk the Appalachian Trail. The second half of the book will convince you that anyone who has ever done this has achieved something truly remarkable.

Lots of very funny stories by a gifted storyteller. Interspersed with some serious passages that makes anyone realize our forests are in decline and need help. Lots of help.

Recent reads -- Pistol: The Life of Pete Maravich

Pistol: The Life of Pete Maravich
Mark Kriegel

I grew up admiring Pete Maravich and his play. As always, life is more complicated than it appears and this biography provides an interesting look into a very complicated, and unhappy at times, life.

So while millions admired Pete Maravich and his abilities, most didn't realize how much work it took and how much he did it to please his father. A warning for all fathers who live their lives through their children.

Recent reads -- Send

Send
David Shipley and Will Schwalbe

A book on sending email? Sounds a bit much. But as email becomes an increasingly important communications tool a book like this, unfortunately, is necessary. Much of what is in here is basic common sense. However, it amazes me how much drivel I get over email.

If you don't want to buy this, the main message is contained in the authors' URL: Think Before You Send.

Recent reads -- Season of Life

Season of Life
Jeffrey Marx

I stumbled across this one. Jeffrey Marx takes football (something my sons are getting more and more involved with) and uses it to teach a few life lessons mostly about what it means to be a man and relationships between men. Joe Ehrmann, formerly of the Colts, is a great inspiration and has done something we all strive to do but many times fall short -- have an impact on others.

Travels -- Mackinac Island

Here for the annual trek. We're not part of the Chicago YC Mackinac Race but seems that way.

The trickle becomes a flood

This report by Wachovia Equity Research confirms what most people already know -- the migration of ads from newspapers to online is only getter worse (or better depending on your perspective.)

Nothing dramaticly new except this comment at the end of the E&P article:
Wachovia estimates that Internet advertising would have to grow 15% per year over the next decade to reach the ad dollars spent on newspapers (or about $35 billion). But that scenario doesn't have to play out in order for the Internet to "have significant impact on the advertising industry as a whole," wrote Wachovia analysts. "It's already having an impact."

At least one newspaper executive will cite this as an example there's nothing to worry about since there's plenty of time. Just remember - all leaks not addressed lead to a sinking.

Travels -- South Bend

A quick stop on our way north. Took a tour of the Notre Dame campus and luck was with us. Got a tour of the stadium, locker room and got to stand on the field. My sons, all ND fans, were speechless. We now have photos they will cherish the rest of their lives.

Travels -- Chicago

Even though I am from NY, it's a skyline I've always loved. Traveling through on the way to vacation. Hot, hot.

What's in a name?

"Branding", however it's defined, has always befuddled and amused me. It's something that everyone talks about but everyone disagrees on its definition.

Here's a good commentary by Seth Godin on how not to name products and how to really confuse customers. He uses Apple as a good example:

First, Apple was a brand that modified a noun. Apple Computer, Apple II, Apple III. Then Macintosh was a brand that was modified by a brand that modified a noun. Apple Macintosh computer. Then Apple Mac IIfx computer, etc.

Then Apple was a brand that modified a brand that modified no noun at all. Apple Newton.

Then Apple modified its own subbrand by adding the letter "i" in front of it. Apple iMac.

Then they went back to the Newton strategy, with a twist: Apple iPod. The thing is, the "i" in Mac modified something we knew what it was (a Mac). But what's a "pod"?

Wait, it gets a lot worse.
. . .
Good point.

Why sharing isn't always the right thing to do

Mark Potts points out the recent surge in LinkedIn in activity and wonders about its value.

I too wonder if this is something of real value but continue to play along because somewhere in the back of my brain I keep thinking this will prove of value down the road. I just can't articulate it.

Now we have Richard Waters of the FT pointing out one downside to sharing your network. At some point you do have to wonder how much you really want to share.

The signs are obvious

There are certain signs that you're in a business that is contracting. The Burlington Free Press has eliminated free parking and bottled water.

“Essentially, (Publisher Jim Carey) said the paper is not making enough money
and they have to make cuts somewhere,” said one Freeps journalist. Carey told
workers that management is “trying to avoid layoffs, though that is under
discussion.”

Talk about foreshadowing.

What is branding?

I've heard countless explanations, most of which are just hot air. Stan Slap (yes, that's his name) had some interesting comments at the May Microsoft CEO Summit on branding that I thought made a lot of sense.

"Branding is creating faith in three groups that absolutely can't be fooled. Your manager culture, your employee culture and your customer culture."

"Branding is not an action, it's a reaction."

"The purpose of branding is not to communicate your intent to the world. Branding is why the world should care."

Slap (hard to write that) argues this is the role of the CEO, not the CMO. It's not a marketing and advertising excercise.