We don't need brands, don't you think?

Tell me if I'm wrong, but there are alternatives for brands, aren't there?

I mean, it became quite obvious to me that what people actually go for aren't 'brands'. They go for real, immediate, and personal advantages.

Of course, brands can deliver advantages. But most of them don't. Especially not in their advertising. A pity, isn't it? I was deeply diappointed when I realized advertising - for decades - seemed to be very content with its crude reason to be: People don't know better.

But that changes.


(Note in German saying: "What a stupid ad")

People start to do know better, and at the end no one will need advertising, because people will know better than ad agencies can. But that's not a problem. It's the beginning of the greatest time in ad history. A fun time. And play time. I'm not kidding.

Sure, it's great if you are able to tell a wonderful story in a 60 second TV commercial. But it's hard work. And you never really know if it's really going to be great.

Call me a windbag if you think I'm wrong, but I believe that it's even easier today to fascinate people with what we used to call advertising. We just have to consider our job - the advertiser's job - as delievering 'advantage on attention' and give a damn about vision, mission, and values. These things are only crucial when all competitors in a market are equally using the chances creative sales-support-services offer.

You didn't know about what Google was standing for when you used it the first time, did you? You just took advantage of what they offered: A way to cope with the internet.

These services I am thinking of aren't neccessarily web based services. A very old offline example of them is the Guide Michelin. A more recent interpretation that I think is fun using, is the PIMM's Sunshine Finder by Agency Republic.

Hopefully, we will see more and more of such creative sales-support-services in the future.

And none of the "old media" institutions have to be frightened of losing their reason to be - as ad agencies do not have to, neither. We only need to dramatically re-think what our job is all about tomorrow: Is it telling stories, or is it creating real, immediate, and personal advantages?

What would you say?

FSK für Facebook-Status und Tweets

Angeregt durch die stete Kritik einiger Kollegen, es gäbe zu viele "bin aufm Klo" Statusmeldungen* auf Facebook und Twitter, kam mir die Idee einer freiwilligen Selbstkontrolle und Kennzeichnung selbiger. Wie für Filme gang und gäbe würde sich jeder Publizierende vorab kritisch mit dem Informationsgehalt seiner Status (Plural mit langem u) auseinandersetzen und eine entsprechende Kennzahl dem Status voranstellen. Diese würde aber eben nicht dem Schutz der Jugend vor Gewalt und sexuellen Inhalten dienen, sondern der ganzen Menschheit zum Schutz vor unnötiger Informationsüberflutung - vorausgesetzt man ist nicht an den Verdauungsrythmen seiner Freunde interessiert.

*) "bin aufm Klo" Statusmeldungen sind als stellvertretend für alle Glücksnüsse, "Welche U-Bahnlinie bist Du Rätsel" und spontanen Gefühlsausdrücke ohne das Ziel, tatsächlich eine Konversation zu initiieren, zu verstehen. Zum Beispiel: umpf.

Um eine Verwechslung mit den FSK-Zahlen auszuschließen würde ich die Bezeichnung FSKdI (Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle des Informationsgehalts) empfehlen - mit einer Skala von 1=Glückskeks bis 12="Bitte dringend um Rückruf" oder ähnlich dramatisches.

Ein paar Beispiele, um ein Gefühl für die Kategorisierung zu bekommen:

FSKdI 3 = "hat gestern Tatort geguckt"
FSKdI 5 = "muss noch mit dem Hund raus"
FSKdI 7 = "braucht mal wieder Urlaub" (Call for Action)
FSKdI 9 = "hat da eine Frage:..."
FSKdI 11 = "bittet folgendes zu bedenken:..."

In etwa so. Vielen Dank für Euer Interesse.

This is when Facebook gets odd.

I just got notified that a friend of mine answered the question mentioned in the picture above. And, please, don’t get me wrong – especially not YOU if you should read this post. I am absolutely fine with taking part in these Q&A entertainment formats available on Facebook. And I’m fine with taking naked photos. Why not;-)

This post is not about human behaviour.
This is about something like internet-terrestrial attacks.

Because, what I am not fine with is to get notified by a technology based system, about things other people probably don’t want to notify me about, at all. They are pretty likely not even aware about the fact that I get notified.

And this is my point. This is were I have to show my media lawyer and human rights advocator side. Let me show you how ‘What your friends think’ works.


You get asked questions like the one above and have to decide: answer YES, answer NO, or don’t answer, and – and I’m quite sure this mostly gets overlooked – do I want this friend to get notified about what I think. Of course you have to check the box in order NOT to notify him or her, which is because getting to know things you usually don’t get to know about is a powerful fuel of social networks and social media. Specifically, it’s a fuel of socializing in general.

These are the little tricks I don’t like about social media applications. Because they try to outsmart fundamental human rights which, in this case, is the right of informational self-determination.

I am really sorry that I didn’t find a more ‘reliable’ source than the wikipedia site above, but it describes the right quite accurately, as far as I know it from my lectures. In a nutshell: It’s ‘The right of the individual to decide what information about himself should be communicated to others...’ and that comprises ‘What your friends think’ as well.

I know, this legal construct sounds like a German invention – it’s so unhandy and, well, constructed. And you probably might have read: It is a German invention indeed. But I have to say that I am proud of it, and want the right to be protected. Because it’s important.

I don’t want to know everything my friends think about me. It’s there business. It's their right to think about me what they want. All that I can do is to make it as hard as possible for them, to make it anything bad.


(Again, this post didn’t get written because of a personal problem with the ‘naked picture’ question. Not at all. That’s fine with me. And if you should want some send me an email;-)

No. That’s about a matter of principle in the developement of social media applications.)

Dinge, die niemand sonst tut: zumindest nicht...

...in U-Bahnen.

Gestern wurde ich auf dem Heimweg Zeuge einer skurril wirkenden Begebenheit. In der U-Bahn lehnte eine Frau an ihrem Fahrrad, am Handgelenk eine Hundeleine, an dieser wiederum ein Hund - und in ihren Händen?

Ein etwa zigarettenschachtel-großes Stück Holz, das sie mit einem kleinen Stechbeitel, und außerdem mit Sandpapier bearbeitete.

Ob es nun an den von ihr ins Holz eingearbeiteten Ornamenten, an ihrem Äußeren (was eigentlich keinen Grund zur Besorgnis gab), an Hund, Leine oder Fahrrad lag - die Gute zog jedenfalls mehrere ungläubige Blicke auf sich.

Wie so oft macht eben der Kontext völlig normale Tätigkeiten zu einem Hingucker. Man stelle sich nur vor, die Frau hätte in der Werkstatt einer Tischlerei gesessen. Kein Mensch, nicht mal ein Münchener hätte sich nach ihr umgedreht.

Auf mich hat die Szenerie jedenfalls Eindruck gemacht. Und ich schließe mit der Erkenntnis, dass Verstören ganz einfach ist. Man muss eben nur wissen wo.

It's proven: Ideas are key.

Thanks for your input. Not only overhere, but also on my facebook profile.
I think it's scientifically proven;-) People are more likely to become a fan of an idea, than of anything else.

That’s a relief I have to say. Because, what else than ‘ideas’ are brands and trends? They are assumptions and associations concerning a product or service, or implications that come along with them.

@Sophie: I agree that ‘experience’ is quite important in building these associations. And probably its importance varies from culture to culture, country to country. (That might be the next poll;-)

But let me get back to the very beginning of our thoughts: My reason for asking the question of ‘fandom’ was the whole ‘become a fan of...’ thing on facebook. And I assume that the less concrete you are in what you ‘offer’ people to become a fan of, the more fans you will get. Because people will be able to think of ‘the topic’ as what they want it to be.

Again, this is where Hector Hugh Munro, aka ‘Saki’ comes in: ‘When baiting a mousetrap with cheese, always leave room for the mouse.’


Update: Official poll results, 2009-03-06

What are you fanatic about?

Due to 'recent work related developments' I started wondering what people might be 'fanatic' about. That's why I would highly appreciate your participation in a small survey, that you will find on the right hand side of this web page.

Even if there will be only three participants - as in my last poll about the American presidential election - I will stick to the restults and take them for granted. It worked for the last time as well, when Obama won by 2 to 1 against McCain. So, as you see, it was quite representative.

Thanks in advance for your interest in scientific research.


stephan

P.S: If you should have more to say than just A, B, C, or D, please use the comments option. Thx.

Rechenhilfe.

Die Süddeutsche Zeitung hat uns gestern in Kooperation mit der Tagesschau ein Rechenrätsel aufgegeben: Wer kann bei der Lösung helfen?

Zu den einzelnen Fakten:
Die US Regierung will die eigene Wirtschaft mit 789 Milliarden Dollar ankurbeln. Soweit der erste Hinweis aus der SZ. In der Tagesschau ließ man dazu verlauten, dass diese Finanzspritze ca. 3,5 Millionen Arbeitsplätze schaffen soll. So weit, so gut.

Nun will die Deutsche Bundesregierung die hiesige Hypo Real Estate mit insgesamt 100 Milliarden Euro stützen. (Beim aktuellen Dollarkurs entspricht das, ganz grob, immerhin einem Sechstel des Konjunkturprogramms für die gesamte amerikanische Wirtschaft.)

Nun zur Frage: Ist die Hypo Real Estate so 'ne große Nummer, oder ist Obama etwa knausrig?