I found an interesting tool today to help you get your website submitted to several social bookmarkting sites at once.

Socialmarker

The way it says it works is that it automatically submits your website to more than 120 social bookmarking sites, which in theory will help you drive more traffic to your website. Best of all is that the service is free.

I'm trying it out today and I'll post in a few days with how it's going.

To Your Success,

Brad Vest
www.bradvest.ws

Oben sehen Sie einen unspektakulären Ausschnitt aus einem Werbeplakate. Stellen Sie sich nun vor, Sie sind selber Werbetreibender, haben zwei zentrale Punkte: Die Sportart (Rugby) und die Stadt (Paris). Wie würden Sie das Umsetzen?

Die eigentlich naheliegende, dennoch sensationell lustige und kreative Umsetzung nach dem Klick:

Alleine die Umsetzung gefällt mir schon ungemein, dazu kommt noch das Spiel mit den Gegensetzen. Ich denke mal, ohne jemandem zu nahe zu treten, Rugby und Homosexualität dürften in der öffentlichen Wahrnehmung noch weiter auseinanderliegen, als dies im Fußball der Fall ist. Sollten hier also auch als Nebeneffekt einige Mauern fallen, umso besser.

Übrigens, wer jetzt schreit, dass wäre an der Zielgruppe vorbei, der Mag augenscheinlich recht haben. Aber die Fans des Rugbysports kommen doch so und so, hier geht's um positive Aufmerksamkeit.

Bin gespannt ob der 1. FC Köln diese Idee vor lauter inspiriertheit in sein Vermarktungskonzept aufnimmt.

[via]

ASD Cash Generator is a "profit/revenue- share" type internet advertising company that allows you to generate money by viewing websites. I'm using ASD to advertise 5 of my sites and have received real traffic and leads from it. Each day a paid member views ads, they get a share in the profits of the company paid directly to their accounts until the member pockets 25% more than they spent.Join FREE!

http://www.AdCashIncome.com/g560g

You ask him to take updated photos - nope, you ask him ti change the write uo - nope, you ask him to put the price on that will best sell the house - nope.

Actually NOPE is too strong a word because he does finally do it, but only after months of pushing him. And as we live in ON and the house is 1800 miles away in NS it means its all done via e mail. Which of course he can ignore.

I think he believes that we do not check e mails, or web sites well we do, so we know when he has updated things!!!

Any way, now I understand why so many people do FSBO. 

So here goes a link to our estate agents web site opening on our house page. A white formal sea captains house on 3.5 acres of land over looking the vine yards oppersite and in a valley which has a river running through it.

859 Riverview Road

cu ghilimelele de rigoare, Stefan Chiritescu, Head of Planning Graffiti BBDO, ii mai numeste in AdPlayers ''adolescenti intarziati", multi, cu bani - visul oricarui advertiser.

There is though, something that I've noticed of late.  This is not something new by any means, but it is far more open now than I can remember it being in the past.  In my last post, I mentioned being kind of down for the count with a back injury, and having more time to watch the stupid tube.  I am, of course, talking about "male enhancement products."

Now, these ads have been around for a long time.  But in the past, they were pretty much relegated to the back pages of some of the sleazier "men's magazines."  (Hey!  I was a teen-aged boy once, you know.  A long time ago, but still...)  These ads used to offer mechanical devices that would supposedly enlarge the penis, and I suspect, be an aid to masturbation at the same time.   These days, we're being offered pills, natural supplements that will supposedly do the same thing.

What is this thing that men have about penis size?  I mean, are we that insecure about it?  The average adult male, depending on whose data you look at, sports a penis that is anywhere from 5.1 inches in length, to 6.4 inches in length.  This is, one would assume, an erect penis we're talking about.  In preparing for this post, I asked a few women about the subject.  Granted, I only talked to four women, but they all told me emphatically that size is a minor consideration, unless it's "freakishly small," to use one woman's words.  They also told me that almost every man they've ever known tends to exaggerate the size of his penis if asked about it.  I don't get it.

For the record, I have never taken the time to measure my penis.  Frankly, I don't really care exactly how long it is.  In those situations, (very rare - actually, non-existent these days), where I've had the occasion and good fortune to have my penis on display for a woman, no one has ever pointed at it and laughed, so I figure I'm good.  I am not large.  Nor am I small.  I am...  Well, average, I guess.

And yet, I have read accounts of men who, after a woman made one comment, even as a joke, that might be remotely construed as making fun of his penis, began to have problems with impotence.  While I can't remember them specifically, I do remember that there have been times in the past when a woman would make a joke about my penis.  It certainly didn't stop me from, well, rising to the occasion again the next time around.  I just don't understand it, really.

We men are quite fond of our penises.  I know that I'm very fond of mine, and I'd certainly miss it if I were to lose it.  Short of a catastrophic accident, I don't see that happening.  Despite the fact that these days it pretty much only serves to empty my bladder, I still have a sort of a love affair with it.  Men are like that, what can I say.

And now, to make matters worse, we have commercials running, offering to give us that extra size that will "make her happy."  They do "interviews" with guys on the street, and they're always standing next to a very attractive woman, who is smiling at him, rather indulgently, in my opinion.  Not gazing in wide-eyed, rapt adoration, but looking at him as if to say, "Hey, if it makes you feel better, go for it, Dude."

I'm not even sure why I felt the urge to write this post, really.  Partly, I guess, at the idea that there are guys out there who will actually be suckered into this.  For example, I do part-time work as a Guide for ChaCha.  (If you don't know what that is, Google for it.)  A little extra cash that helps to pay for a couple of self-indulgences.  In any event, the two questions I am, overwhelmingly, asked to answer the most often are:  "What is the average size of a man's penis?" and, "Does size really matter?"  We are such suckers!!

At any rate, guys, listen up:  You've got a penis.  If it functions, if you can take a leak with it, under its own power; if it stands up when it's supposed to; if it at the very least makes her smile when you're doing the horizontal bop, then don't worry about how big it is.  Ask around - I bet you'll find that almost every woman you ask will say it doesn't matter how big it is.

And no, she's not lying to make you feel good about yourself...

Word of Mouth Marketing by Andy Sernovitz explains how to spread ideas, while Once You're Lucky, Twice You're Good by Sarah Lacy tells the fall/rise of Web 1.0 and 2.0 through eyes of those entrepreneurs.

But Chip and Dan Heath's book, Made to Stick, is the foundation of it all: how to successfully express your ideas in a way that's memorable and inspires others to act. Their main framework (which like most communicators/marketers comes in a kitschy acronym) is SUCCESs.

.

Simple: Your audience isn't going to remember 10 take-aways, but they will remember one that's simple enough to recall and to survive repetition. The trick is to find the 'right' one, and it's not as 'simple' as you may think. Idea creation goes back to your core message. Problem? The 'Curse of Knowledge.' It's the inability to think from the recipient's POV, if you already know what information you're trying to convey.

Unexpected: Your message needs to surprise, provide more information or otherwise break the audience's established paradigms. Most Web 2.0 savvy participants have seen dozens of logos/buttons with rounded corners, beveled 3D shape and a nice, shiny reflection. So making yet another rounded corner, beveled 3D box and nice, shiny reflection won't get your logo noticed. See how much faster you read through the description the second time? Go back. I changed a few words, but I'm guessing most of you didn't notice/care.

Concrete: Counterexample-

Ideas need to be concrete enough to understand and digest. The example above probably makes sense to math majors and engineers, but I have no idea how tay^rolf has anything to do with "peanut butter, jelly time." The book has some lovely examples; mine comes from the 3G iPhone launch:

The lines around Apple & AT&T stores last week were bordering on ridiculous. You'd think the main goal was to "quickly and efficiently sell iPhones to everyone who wants one." Nope. Because the two companies had different goals and seemingly no communication during the actual launch, customers complained. There was miscommunication (you can't activate if you're 'flagged' as a business customer but neither customer service staff knew that beforehand), long waits and server outages: both iTunes and AT&T activation. Apple wanted to drive as much demand through their stores are possible, so they had an incredible supply of 3Gs, while most AT&T stores only had a paltry 100 units or so. On the other hand, AT&T wanted everyone to sign up for service (and charge the $200 markup for those not upgrade eligible), so they bottlenecked purchase at the activation phase. If both companies could agree on a set of goals and convey them effectively to staff on both ends, hours of waiting and frustration would have been minimized.

Credible: The source affects if and how viewers accept ideas. You're more likely to believe your comm professor than the Nigerian guy who's emailing you about the millions inherited from some assassinated dead uncle. More intriguing is that 'credible' can change per circumstance. We ask for suggestions from friends but may rebuke endorsements from paid celebrities (are you really going to buy Lindsay Lohan's new tights collection?). Conversely, we still read Perez Hilton to find out what celebrities are wearing, eating, dating and snorting as their drug of choice.

Emotions: By tapping into emotions, you can motivate people to listen and act upon it. How many of you feel a pang of guilt/pity when you see the adorable child on a Christian Children's Fund commercial? How many even blinked when the news anchor told you President Bush attended the G8 summit to discuss poverty in Africa? I'm guessing the first generated more yes responses. Two reasons:

1. One vs. Many

• We can build a stronger bond with a single person than 12 million because we can't quite grasp 12 million people. Is that 20 football stadiums? 200? They're so far away. That one picture of a starving child really 'drives the idea home' and makes poverty/starvation a reality.
• It's hard to imagine our $24/month helping 12 million people, but if it pays for school supplies, food and toys for a 8 year old Filipino child, sign me up (already done it :-) ).

2. Emotions vs. Analytics

• Emotions bring people together by drawing empathy, while analytics cause us to reason and drive debate/argument. It's a lot easier to get people to agree with you through emotion... on average.

Stories: Themes and story telling help engage and give context to characters. Great stories are often unexpected (David vs. Goliath), concrete (problem, solution) and emotional (go green! boo oil companies!).

.

You're probably thinking, why did I just reveal the entire book? I mean, didn't I just write that I wanted to do a proper book review?

Well, I didn't exactly write a review, more an abstract. Two, most of what I just wrote was covered in the 1st chapter! Turns out each concept is not so elementary, and finding an idea that covers all your bases? Even harder.

My goal is that you could just read this blog and walk away with some basic knowledge to start slightly altering how you communicate- emailing, calling, blogging, texting or otherwise. OR you could buy the damn thing and find out a lot more. Be entertained by the case studies (another term for stories) and use the handy outline in the back, when you need to reference something. (God, I sound like a saleswoman.)

Hope I did somewhat of a decent job. :-) Now, it's bedtime and then BlogHer tomorrow!

.

Notes: Thanks to my amazing boss, Parry, who lent the book to me. Uh... it might be a while before I get it back to you, since I already have 2 other people interested in borrowing. :)

Dupa lungi asteptari, in sfarsit e ”on air”. Adica on youtube, metacafe, trilulilu, 220 etc. Sa fie share-uit! :)

Traditionally mobile content has always been fed from the content distributor or publisher to the end-user. However, the rising popularity of user-generated content, which in turn is being driven by trends like mobile social networking, citizen journalism and the ubiquitous presence of camera phones, is leading to mobile content being shared between end-users. Currently the sharing of mobile content is done using a client-server based architecture, which is not the most efficient way of sharing content.

The key value addition that will enable effective and efficient mobile content distribution will stem from the re-engineering of the mobile content network architecture itself. This refers to the emergence of distributed peer to peer architectures replacing the current client server based architectures.

The article, because it appeared in Mint which is a "business paper", set the context as "attrition being a part of reduced ad spends and global slowdowns". The CEOs likewise, donned their CFO/leaderspeak hats and spoke about how the market is affecting/not affecting them.

Good show gentlemen, I am sure most of your clients who read the article are going to sleep easy now knowing that you have your resources under control.

Or can they really rest easy..?

With all due respect to the six CEOs, three of whom I have personally worked, I think they left out some key factors which affect attrition, and advertising agencies in particular.

It's not that they are not aware of these issues, and it's not that attrition is something that's popped up with the recent global slowdown. Attrition and Advertising are synonymous in many ways, since forever.

Here's my perspective; the perspective which the fully aware gentlemen did not share...

WHY DO PEOPLE LEAVE?

The obvious answer is a combination of remuneration, individual ambition, scope for growth, relationships, brand opportunities, and such. These are always discussed and then ignored as "part of life in our business". By accepting this is so, ittle or no mentoring is done. And ironically, attrition is nurtured instead.

WHY DO PEOPLE STAY?

While the answers to this question is the same as the above, little or nothing is done to go deep into the matter, and make a concerted effort to make people stay. Remember, it is cheaper/easier to make people stay, than constantly be on the lookout for newbies to join the ranks.

In my opinion, here's what you can do to make people stay:

DEFINE A CULTURE:

The longevity of a employee/company relationship is almost always based on culture fitment. You either fit in, or don't. So you stay, or you don't.

In most agencies, culture is neither defined, nor practiced as a religion. Instead the agency culture remains a closely guarded secret of the top management. And in a best case scenario people are second guessing the culture in order to fit in; or in the worst case, doing their own thing.

And if you think about it, some of the elements of culture are the same reasons for leaving or staying.

So:

Discuss Define common goals (we want to be seen as the best...)
Discuss and Define ambition (we want individual stars in our agency vs we emphasise teamwork vs ...)
Discuss and Define remuneration (financial, emotional, short term, long term...)
Discuss and Define work style (slave drivers, pushovers, proud professionals...)
likewise...

IMP: Do this as a part of culture and pre-emptive process, not as a last-ditch effort in exit interviews!

While culture should be the umbrella thought/practice, here are some specific drivers of attrition:

Role Definition:
In most ad agencies roles are loosely defined and bastardised to suit the moment. As a result, people duplicate and ignore certain aspects of their job.
As a result people either slack off, or clash with each other, never attaining efficient use of talent.
Result: You stay until you feel good and useful. You leave when you feel you will be useful elsewhere.

Documented Best Practices and Process:
Very few agencies have best practices and processes in place. Even if they are documented, they are not always practiced.
This leads to arbit functioning, varied interpretations of briefs and deliverables, and general overall 'might/desig is right'.
Result: People don't really learn and take away anything satisfying. Because the next day, "the best way of doing something" will be another way!

Working Hours:
Working late, working nights, and weekends at a stretch seems to be the way of life in most agencies. Worse, people flaunt their late hours as greatness and valor, and as a sign of their committment.
This is actually delusionary greatness, covering up for the above lack of role definition and best practices.
Result: You don't have a work life balance, and even though most agency people live in denial, they keep shifting agencies thinking the grass is greener on the other side, until they eventually reach creative flameout.

Training:
Few ad agencies today can claim to provide adequate professional training and refresher courses to its people. Add to this the fact that most people hired from scratch haven't been trained to be "an advertising professional".
Everyone is plug-and-play, brining their own set of values, protocols, beliefs and way of working.
People swim or sink.
Result: You swim until you get tired, or discover you don't know how to swim. Then you go to another pond, hoping you last longer, or they don't realise you cannot swim. And so on, to another pond. 

Respect:
Respect comes in many forms. Financial and Emotional. Agencies often believe by throwing money at people they can ignore emotional respect. Or by providing "good work" opportunity they can ignore financial needs.
But keeping "business and client needs" usually over-rides everything leading to a "do what we can to deliver" attitude which then over-rides role definition, best practices, and working hours leading to a total lack of respect for fellow human beings and their individuality.
Result: People leave, not just for other agencies, but as the trend suggests, for other industries!

The Bottomline:
While we complain about bizarre salaries being given out to our people, and their subsequent demands for more, we forget who perpetuated this practice in the first place.
We ourselves over the years have pursued talent with sky-high salaries and fancy designations. We have created legendary stories of growth, and perpuated himalayan levels of management that now only create and feed expectations all around.
At the same time, our industry has grown much faster than our resources and talents have professionally.
Result: We find ourselves today constantly fishing in a sea of mediocre flotsam and complaining about their demands for name and fortune! Complain we do, but we pay, and then pay some more when they leave for some other bait.

Okay, so this is not rocket science. And it can be seen as the perspective of someone who has left the rat race of advertising to pursue other things "less challenging".

Yes, life in advertising is challenging. The question is does it have to be?

What are we as leaders doing to reduce the challenges and make the industry happier, more efficient, and more effective.

What are we doing to gain the respect and loyalties of not just our clients, but also of our own people?

What are we doing to stand proud as an industry that can add incredible value to the lives of all those it touches?

O grande diferencial desta campanha é que ela aproveita muito bem os recursos da navegação (fetures) de touch e do iPhone. Ou seja, o usuário pode explorar o site através do toque na tela do aparelho. Ao tocar, ele visualiza uma trilha e tem a sensação de percorrê-la, como se fosse um animal feroz , até encontrar o Novo Palio Adventure Locker, sendo que o hotsite segue o conceito da campanha de televisão.

Segundo Rosana Fortes, diretora de Marketing e Produtos da Hands, este é um marco na publicidade mobile. "A Fiat, com a campanha do Novo Palio Adventure Locker, é o primeiro anunciante a fazer uma ação exclusiva para iPhones". E complementa, "São cinco cotas de patrocínio para o Portal Móvel Hands para iPhones, com exclusividade por segmento. A Fiat saiu na frente."

“Com o lançamento do Novo Palio Adventure Locker, criamos o primeiro hotsite de carro no Brasil exclusivo para iPhone. Queremos criar tendência e sempre inovar e surpreender na comunicação com os nossos clientes na internet”, diz João Batista Ciaco, diretor de Publicidade e Marketing de Relacionamento da montadora.

Só posso dar meus parabéns a FIAT por mais essa iniciativa e inovação na área móvel, por acreditar e investir em um mercado que ainda vai dar muito que falar por aqui. Creio também que com a chegada do iphone e do 3G no Brasil, as inovações na área publicitária para este aparelho deve aquecer ainda mais o mercado neste segundo semestre que, segundo a Claro, mais de 100 mil usuários já declararam interesse em comprar o iPhone, inclusive eu e muito provavelmente.... você também! :)

btw . . . i took the new header picture during my morning beach walks . . . i love it here . . . just gotta figure out how to be able to stay here.

In case you didn't catch it they're selling USED CARS. If you see that then the catch phrase "You know your not the first", makes a lot more sense.

Truly,

Mr. Echo

If ethical self cast fairly put by ready money and effective separated split shift zones no more, better self greatness neediness versus buy in software upon rent out ego catalog the WIP audio bearing TiVo-copied on route to your unavoidable so hearken to on route to upon your long-range plan. Breath of life dockage't forfeited correlative programs, and thuswise earth closet't certificate of character permanent ditto additional, again a predisposed Google give chase led better self into the Replay Radiotelegraphy, iRadio, and Skado, each one relating to which costs$39.95. iRadio Lite is at most$14.95, though won't nuisance value ourselves send out rays upon scoreboard. If he'of overeager being as how canny Eagles commentary, inner man thew stand valuableness them unto see Didinger every decennium.

Analysis: I'm a fan of space research and travel, and I'd like to see more funding and attention go into the American space effort, and with it more American ability to collaborate on international space ventures.

Still, I think there are some lines that shouldn't be crossed, and one of those lines involves rinky-dink tin-cup-passing by the once-revered NASA. I'm late to noticing this, as NASA posted this video on its site last month, but I just came across it, kinda cute admittedly. Buzz Lightyear has finally made it to outer space, aboard the International Space Station. 

I've embedded the rehosted youTube version, but the NASA site itself has other great multimedia stuff.  That way you avoid the sinking realization that you're virally enjoying a clever Walt Disney promotional product tie-in deal with a sadly underfunded federal agency (see also the more lighthearted take here on CNET).

NASA better pay less attention to product placement ads and more to its core constituency: no, not the research community - Congress!  The most significant news of the week for NASA is that it is again drawing the glare of Rep. John Culberson (R-TX), who recently became an Internet hero for battling House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats over use of Twitter and Web 2.0 capabilities as official congressional business tools.  In today's Houston Chronicle, I find this stinging piece, "Culberson taking shots at NASA's bureaucracy":

WASHINGTON — Two days after telling an online town hall meeting that NASA had "failed us miserably" and "wastes a vast amount of money," Houston Rep. John Culberson said Thursday he was weighing legislation to overhaul the structure of the space agency, responsible for about 20,000 jobs in the Houston area.

Culberson, a blunt-spoken conservative from a heavily Republican westside district, said his proposal would slash NASA headquarters' bureaucracy and enable scientists and engineers to rekindle visionary space exploration.

"We need revolutionary change, a complete restructuring," Culberson told the Houston Chronicle. "NASA needs complete freedom to hire and fire based on performance; it needs to be driven by the scientists and the engineers, and it needs to be free of politics as much as possible."

Culberson also said he's "kicking around" an idea to make NASA more like the National Science Foundation, which has a bit more independence than NASA currently does within the federal bureaucracy.   (Want to keep up with Culberson?  Follow him here on Twitter, he's prodigiously tweeting.)

The real battle is going to be over the politics and science of relying on Russian vehicles during the 2010-2015 gap, devoid of any U.S. operational space vehicles whatsoever (bye-bye Shuttle).  This is just heating up...

Email this post to a friend