Quick case study: Kindle marketing the marketer

It was time to join Twitter, but so far I'm wrestling with the value. Will certainly give it a chance, though.

From a marketing perspective, the Twitter trap became clear pretty fast: here we have a whole new world of targeted cold-calling. On Friday, I tweeted --

Tangent: really? "Twitter" and "tweet"...this lingo is the best we can do? I was always embarrassed to order McNuggets because it sounded so infantile and senseless (yes, even as I child I was appalled by the degradation of language). Then the web came and we somehow landed on Blog for web log and now Twitter, tweet? Hulu? What's going on?!

-- on Friday, I tweeted that I saw a Kindle (there's another one!) in action and while I'm a paper book purist I couldn't help but think it was tremendously cool. Within minutes, a representative from Kindle appeared to follow me on Twitter and offer me deals on Kindle merchandise. Is this the age of the Quickdraw Guerrilla Marketing? QGM...Did I just coin a text-able acronym?

Scoreboard:
Twitter appreciation: 0
Twitter skepticism: 1

Should Obama stay off Leno?

Reader JD put a good question to me the other day regarding Obama's appearance on Leno: is he taking Presidential access too casually?



It was certainly a little strange to see a Presidential entrance accompanied by a talk-show band version of Hail to the Chief. On the other hand, as a candidate these kinds of appearances are almost expected in order to get messages out to the "real America" (i.e., tv viewers). Once the race is over and the President is in office, why should this channel of communication be closed?

I wrote eons ago that candidates were mastering a wide range of new outreach mechanism, from talk shows to social media. The trend is carrying on, as the White House website now features just about every communication vehicle imaginable, and every step that's been taken points to a commitment to transparency and accessibility. Plain and simple, this administration wants everyone to understand...everything.

For that reason I have no problem with the Leno appearance, although he obviously needs to stay on message and away from the Special Olympics jokes.

Fall-out boy: more on the obligations of financial journalists

Thanks to astute reader DS for sending this on: Thomas Frank offers an opinion piece in the WSJ that calls financial commentators out on the carpet, supporting the Jon Stewart mission noted in yesterday's post on Thinking Telos. Surprising to see such forthright acknowledgment in the pages of Rupert Murdoch's soul...a snippet:

The reasons the financial-entertainment biz failed us are many and complex, but they ultimately come down to this: In the marketplace to describe the marketplace itself, there is precious little competition. There is a single, standard product that comes in packaging that is alternately sultry, energetic or fun -- bitter, brainy or Cramer "crazy" -- but which rarely strays beyond certain ideological boundaries. Adversarial voices are few. Criticism is sacrificed for access. Advice sometimes shades over into simple propaganda. Even the worst prognosticators sometimes go on to jobs with presidential campaigns or prominent think tanks.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the universe, NBC CEO Jeff Zucker took an embarrassingly narrow stance on the topic. He pulls a nice act here, feigning offense with as much skill as a flopping NBA forward. We can label this under "completely missing the point:"

"Everybody wants to find a scapegoat. That's human nature," Zucker said during a keynote address at a media industry conference. "But to suggest that the business media or CNBC was responsible for what is going on now is absurd."

"Just because someone who mocks authority says something doesn't make it so," Zucker said, describing the comedian's comments as "completely out of line.

Nice to see such a strong ripple effect. Don't fear change, people.

The mission to save media integrity

The Stewart vs. Cramer "event" has been bled pretty dry, and I resisted writing about it to avoid repeating what every other web outlet has already covered. So I won't even touch on how Jon Stewart could very well instigate a movement to restore the press to its true function.

Ok, fine, I will...but the short version.

In 2004, Stewart took CNN's Crossfire to task for wasting their on-air influence by allowing politicians and business leaders to write the rules (and interview questions). Key message from Stewart: "We need help from the media, and they're hurting us." Talk about an uphill battle - that was five years ago, before the media staged a full collapse into the role of conservative enabler and (some have said) contributed to an economic free-fall.

If you're interested, here's a refresher:



Fast forward to last week, when Stewart went back to work against CNBC. He pounded out a similar message that the network prioritizes entertainment over journalism, when its position in the business world really lent them power to recognize the ethically gray trading and corporate trends, call out the culprits and curtail the financial damage.

Here's a summary (full acknowledgment of the irony of using the clip from CNN):



The notable piece of this is not that the confrontation occurred, but that with his Crossfire appearance five years ago Stewart cemented his position as media arbiter. Jim Cramer's doe-eyed surrender not only showed us how accurate Stewart's assessment of CNBC is, but how networks recognize they have to start appeasing his base -- and therefore appeasing him.

I've commented before on the need for the press to turn back to their roots as investigators and truth-tellers. Another Pravda isn't going to do us any favors here, and the country's crisis of conscience and image calls for some "true grit" to remind us of the value of, well, values. With real-time reporting (blogs, Twitter, etc.) emerging as the next evolutionary step, reporters have the opportunity to move the country back in the direction of transparency and progress.

The point? I think Jon Stewart gave us a watershed moment last week. I'm marking the calendar and will check back in another five years...

Wearing my brand on my sleeve

Holy %^$*...this is not a tech blog, so a little left of center here. But one could argue that this will alter media A to Z, including how information and messaging are disseminated. The future is now...?

There are obviously a slew of practical and ethical issues surrounding this kind of technology, but there is no doubt if it comes to fruition it will present enormous opportunities on both sides of the gadgetry. For the consumer, the easy access to information has incredible allure (funny that Ms. Maes points out what a tremendous hassle it would be for us to take our phone out of our pocket in order to gather data on a person or product...I'm sure Everyman circa 1982 would disagree).

For the marketer, it leapfrogs over conventional social networking and online interface by a light year. Imagine attending a speaking engagement and being able to research the speaker and all their published works in the moment. Or playing "six degrees" as you shake someone's hand for the first time.

Crazy, crazy stuff.