Archive for January, 2009

friday free for all

Friday, January 23rd, 2009

… The Oscar noms have been announced. Here’s the list on ScreenCrave. I’ll have more on this later after I’ve cine-binged and have more to say on the topic. (Downey Jr.? Really?)

… Today, for me, is a half day. To say I’m looking forward to my trip to Sydney is an understatement. But so is saying I’m not excited about the travel. Here’s how I imagine the trip going:

  • Depart to Chicago, 3.30p today. Finish one book because it’s written at a third-grade reading level (Left Behind series… heard of it?)
  • Fly to San Francisco. Hustle desperately for connecting flight with only an hour betwixt.
  • Fly to Sydney. Finish another book, pace incessantly, twitch uncontrollably, cry incrementally and murmur gibberish constantly.
  • Arrive in Sydney, 8a Sunday. Wobble off the plane on atrophied legs, kiss the ground and start greeting everyone with “g’day mate!” in a terrible British accent.

Return trip:

  • Repeat the above, in backward order, replacing SFO with LAX and doing it all within one day. End with crushing jet-lag.

… Because of the above, posts next week will be sparse or non-existent. No apologies, just like last time.

(unwarranted) recap of (unattended) MIMA event

Thursday, January 22nd, 2009

Last night I met up with some folk at Shaw’s for their homestyle ronnies. They were delicious, as always but they kept me from the Digital Reputation Management event. Thanks to Ustream and the posting of the recorded event, I was able to “attend.”

Basically, three representatives from early adopting companies talked about how they’re using social media to manage their company’s public image. The commentary is thoughtful and in-depth. If you’re at all interested in using SM to boost your company’s involvement, take a look (it’s over an hour, you’ll need some time; embedded below).

This, obviously, is not a discussion of how SM can boost sales or involvement. It’s not about how having a Twitter account will make you viral or how web 2.0 jolts your ROI. There’s no mention of a call-to-action. (Either is Facebook Connect. Let me pause for your disappointed sighs.)

Steve Bendt (Best Buy, Social Media Activist) brought up Spy (try it out; kind of fun), there was talk of Google Alerts and some examples of how they’ve used Twitter and the ilk to improve and monitor their image. (Lela Phommasouvanh and Tammy Lee Stanoch (of Delta, formerly Northwest) rounded out the three.)

I’m intrigued by some of the mentioned ideas and entertained by how far my office has to come. How do you explain to old-media-centric higher-ups that there’s a new way of doing things when you’ve only been around a few years? (Get fired and go somewhere more amiable to same ideas?)

The video:

proprietary pomposity

Wednesday, January 21st, 2009

Why is it I can’t resist the urge to alliterate? Ridiculous.

Microsoft is impressively stupid. Back in the day they were kicking ass and taking names. Everyone had to be on a MS platform to do anything. Then Apple started gaining market share and MS shat a few mouse trails. (Launched an error-laden OS; spent millions on un-aired ads.)

As I sling interweb code for a living (theoretically) my relations with MS have been more uncomfortable. Their browser (set as default and installed with their OSs) is terrible. It’s a one-legged, fat guy trying to keep up in a pick-up game of 3-on-3 with off-season NBA rookies.

More stretched analogies: It reads CSS like a cranky, dyslexic toddler with only one eye. It complies to standards like Jeffrey Dahmer complied to social norms (too soon?). It creates beautiful web pages like this creates great portraits.

MS is coming out with a new OS that’s supposed to fix their Vista problem. I’m sure it comes with a browser trying hard to be dismal. I’ve heard mixed reviews (read: bad) and then there’s a post from Ken Sipe.

Apparently, MS is making it difficult to download the beta version of Windows 7. Instead of trying to infiltrate other markets they seem to be trying to hold onto as many already-users as possible. (Which, I assume, is 93.75% businesses too terrified to ditch their Outlook and Office Suite.)

Like Facebook, they seem to be trying their hardest to alienate customers while being profitable. (Or, in FB’s case, popular with the venture capital crowd.) Smart move, morons.

Interactives out there, do you still design/program for IE6? Why? Do you still use the 800×600 model? Reasons for doing so? Reasons to move past it?

I, personally, want to let IE6 die a slow, overdue death. @ECaron agrees. Like Wal-Mart using hybrid trucks, he considers Google paying people to leave IE6 to be a matter of corporate responsibility.

history just happened. two hours ago…

Tuesday, January 20th, 2009

I’m sure almost all of you watched the coverage and speech as (most of us) welcomed a new President at 12p, EST. I don’t care. (I do, promise.) Did you see the real historic change?

Just before the speech, WhiteHouse.gov was redesigned. Take a minute, feel it out, then come on back. Or stay there. I can’t trust you people with anything. (President Obama’s proclamation is already there.)

The spacing, typography and colors are outstanding. I have to wonder how much they paid for this and why it wasn’t paid to me. The navigation is intuitive and in-depth. It’s subtle, smart and a perfect reflection of what we hope will come from this new administration.

Most importantly, there’s a little social media. According to @s4xton, the RSS feeds need a little work but I’m encouraged by a blog being there at all. In one of the first posts, there are some changes listed. (Quite awesome.)

The ideas are novel: communication, transparency and participation (and opposite the last eight years). I don’t know how close to the assertions they’ll stay as more traffic heads there and more changes come through but it’s a start. I imagine a controlled, precise and vague set of information but timely and informative.

Congrats to the new WhiteHouse.gov… and Mr. President.

see you at the finish

Monday, January 19th, 2009

Saturday aft, I ran a mile (in person, you can hear my quadriceps sobbing). Granted, I wasn’t going for speed (read: lapped by pentagenarian) but I didn’t have to stop. Subsequently, I’ve decided to be in a triathlon. (No I haven’t.) As such, I’ve started my research.

My first search (“triathlete athletic handsome”) hits with mixed results. The second attempt (“triathlete magazine”) is far more successful. It leads me to TriathleteMag.com and, shortly, sweet, sweet victory.

Being an SMS (social media slut), I had to check Twitter to prove credibility. There I find @TriathleteMag and now have (if I were to follow) timely training tips. It’s a good use of SM to enhance the magazine’s reach.

Their site needs some typography work and their call-outs sort of sigh but it’s not terrible. Combine it with the tips and Triathlete Magazine seems to be a pretty solid resource. I can’t justify a subscription because of the cost. (read: too much pressure to actually race.)

Next steps: swim across Lake Nokomis after the thaw (north to south, ≈ 5000ft; not the pansy east to west) and bike to Chanhassen (≈ 20mi) for dinner and a show. I shouldn’t need to stretch or prepare for either.

But maybe I’m getting ahead of myself.

Unrelated: Paul Blart: Mall Cop beat out Gran Torino at the box office and the world cried.

[facebook] free for all

Friday, January 16th, 2009

I’ve forgone the typical ‘free for all.’ Didn’t notice? Word, thought so. Moving on…

While I don’t personally add applications to my Facebook profile(s), some are all about it. They’re ass deep in “Which Reservoir Dog Am I?” and “All the Places I’ve Been You Haven’t” boxes. Which brings me to the “Whopper Sacrifice.”

Facebook is famous for its cluttered friend lists. Some are still friends with folk they met while filling their URC‘s or those hot girls they met at freshman orientation. (With entire self-tagged albums in bikinis, tagged with “gross” or “fat,” desperate for contradictory comments.)

Why not exploit it? I think the Whopper Sacrifice is a smart concept (read: best they can do; lame). It takes commonality and provides branded incentive to address it. It’s better than the Angry Whopper or [insert recent BK campaign/promotion here] (sans, maybe, the King). And more thoughtful than JCPenney’s “Doghouse.”

Facebook shut it down, citing privacy concerns, and missed the viral publicity. (They have no financial model; you’d think they’d be keen on ideas like this.) The only infringement is a notification to the “sacrificed” they’ve been dumped for a chance at a Whopper, which is different than clearing an inflated friend list.*

For Facebook to take a stand on privacy is hypocritical at best. Their incentive is to make the site more public (promotions, growth) so the bulk of the privacy settings are near-hidden, convoluted to the point of useless (if used at all; not to mention the bugs). The default settings aren’t private.

It’s another in a list of blunders no one remembers. They’ve posted anything you were doing on third-party sites with an opt-out model (because they’re idiots), added the news feed (again, opt-out after backlash) and stupidly redesigned with an option to revert to the old site.

Facebook’s obviously blinded by dumbass so it shouldn’t surprise that they’d miss the whole point of the Whopper Sacrifice. (Is “hope no one realizes we’re inept” a business model?) To think otherwise is Memento-esque.

… Actually, show of hands: before this, how many of you knew about Whopper Sacrifice? Were pissed about the redesign for a week and then forgot how the old one looked? Remember the pre-news feed days? Knew FB and BlockBuster and others are being sued?

Seven, all, none and none of you? Hmm. Well… whatever. Still worth it.

Note: More on the Whopper Sacrifice on I’m Just Sayin’ Show. Inspired by all the projects at PhizzPop last night that were made possible by Facebook’s short-sighted, infringing adaptations.

* The de-friended could easily re-friend the de-friender after s/he’s enjoyed her/his over-sized morsel of near-beef. Whether the now re-friended is subsequently de-friended (again), without their immediate knowledge, is entirely up to the de-friender. (Follow all that? Things got a little rough toward the end there.)