The Cluefree Manifesto

To many web maniacs, a pivotal moment occurred 10 years ago when something called "The Cluetrain Manifesto" was published.

The Cluetrain Manifesto was a foundational document in the "conversationalist" school of marketing. It included "95 Theses" in the style of Martin Luther, meant as a denunciation of contemporary marketing and a clarion call to a new, idealized age of marketing enabled by digital communication.

The Cluetrain Manifesto's “95 Theses” was a smug and annoying document written in the voice of a petulant tenth-grader. Its vision somehow failed to foresee Facebook stalking, idiotic tweets, Viagra spam, or Ethiopian lotteries.

From a distance of 10 years, it seems even more ridiculous.

In celebration of its 10th anniversary, I have taken the liberty of updating it for 2009 -- “The Cluefree Manifesto."

1. Markets are conversations.	1. Markets are conversations. Supermarkets are arguments.
2. Markets consist of human beings, not demographic sectors.	2. Markets consist of aisles and checkout stands and sometimes a nice deli counter.
3. Conversations among human beings sound human. They are conducted in a human voice.	3. Conversations among human beings sound irritating. You're better off watching Cartoon Network.
4. Whether delivering information, opinions, perspectives, dissenting arguments or humorous asides, the human voice is typically open, natural, uncontrived.	4. Whether delivering information, pizza, parcels, or dry cleaning, the human voice is typically screechy and bothersome. Especially my sister-in-law.
5. People recognize each other as such from the sound of this voice	5. People recognize each other and, wisely, cross the street.
6. The Internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not possible in the era of mass media.	6. The Internet is enabling conversations among human beings that were simply not possible when we could see each other and retaliate physically.
7. Hyperlinks subvert hierarchy.	7. Hot links subvert haute cuisine.
8. In both internetworked markets and among intranetworked employees, people are speaking to each other in a powerful new way.	8. In both internetworked markets and among intranetworked employees, internecine indo-chinese intervention is intentionally unintelligible.
9. These networked conversations are enabling powerful new forms of social organization and knowledge exchange to emerge.	9. These networked conversations are enabling new forms of anonymous verbal abuse to emerge.
10. As a result, markets are getting smarter, more informed, more organized. Participation in a networked market changes people fundamentally.	10. As a result, markets are getting smarter. People, on the other hand, are getting way dumber.
11. People in networked markets have figured out that they get far better information and support from one another than from vendors. So much for corporate rhetoric about adding value to commoditized products.	11. People in networked markets have figured out that they get far better information and support from one another than from the IT department.
12. There are no secrets. The networked market knows more than companies do about their own products. And whether the news is good or bad, they tell everyone.	12. There are no secrets. Except how to change line spacing in Powerpoint.
13. What's happening to markets is also happening among employees. A metaphysical construct called "The Company" is the only thing standing between the two.	13. What's happening to markets is also happening among employees. A metaphysical construct called "The Paycheck" is the only thing standing between the two.
14. Corporations do not speak in the same voice as these new networked conversations. To their intended online audiences, companies sound hollow, flat, literally inhuman.	14. Corporations do not speak in the same voice as these new networked conversations. Especially when they inhale helium and talk like gerbils or something.
15. In just a few more years, the current homogenized "voice" of business†"the sound of mission statements and brochures‚" will seem as contrived and artificial as the language of the 18th century French court.	15. In just a few more years, the current homogenized "voice" of business will seem as contrived and artificial as the language of the "Cluetrain Manifesto."
16. Already, companies that speak in the language of the pitch, the dog-and-pony show, are no longer speaking to anyone.	16. Already, companies that speak in the language of the pitch, the dog-and-pony show, are no longer speaking to anyone. Except, of course, their customers.
17. Companies that assume online markets are the same markets that used to watch their ads on television are kidding themselves.	17. Companies that assume online markets exist are kidding themselves.
18. Companies that don't realize their markets are now networked person-to-person, getting smarter as a result and deeply joined in conversation are missing their best opportunity.	18. Companies that don't realize their markets are now networked person-to-person, getting smarter as a result and deeply joined in conversation are probably confused by the structure of illiterate sentences like this.
19. Companies can now communicate with their markets directly. If they blow it, it could be their last chance.	19. Companies can now communicate with their markets directly. Or they can just go there and stand in line like the rest of us.
20. Companies need to realize their markets are often laughing. At them.	20. Smug, pompous doofuses with manifestos need to realize that humans are often laughing. At them.
21. Companies need to lighten up and take themselves less seriously. They need to get a sense of humor.	21. Smug, pompous doofuses with manifestos need to lighten up and take themselves less seriously. They need to get a sense of humor. And maybe an enema wouldn't hurt either.
22. Getting a sense of humor does not mean putting some jokes on the corporate web site. Rather, it requires big values, a little humility, straight talk, and a genuine point of view.	22. Getting a sense of humor does not mean putting some jokes on the corporate web site. Unless they're about farts or poop.
23. Companies attempting to "position" themselves need to take a position. Optimally, it should relate to something their market actually cares about.	23. Companies attempting to "position" themselves need to take a position. I saw one online where the girl was on top. Awesome.
24. Bombastic boasts‚ "We are positioned to become the preeminent provider of XYZ"‚ do not constitute a position.	24. Bombastic boasts do not constitute a position. Except in certain doofus manifestos, which are pretty much nothing but.
25. Companies need to come down from their Ivory Towers and talk to the people with whom they hope to create relationships.	25. Companies need to come down from their Ivory Towers. But be careful. Those Ivory Steps are slippery.
26. Public Relations does not relate to the public. Companies are deeply afraid of their markets.	26. Companies are deeply afraid of their markets and sometimes of their dry cleaners.
27. By speaking in language that is distant, uninviting, arrogant, they build walls to keep markets at bay.	27. By speaking in language that is distant, uninviting, arrogant, doofus manifestos invite parody.
28. Most marketing programs are based on the fear that the market might see what's really going on inside the company.	28. Most manifesto writers fear that people might see what's really on their hard drive.
29. Elvis said it best: "We can't go on together with suspicious minds."	29. Elvis said it best: "Pass the Twinkies, darlin'."
30. Brand loyalty is the corporate version of going steady, but the breakup is inevitable and coming fast. Because they are networked, smart markets are able to renegotiate relationships with blinding speed.	30. Brand loyalty is the corporate version of going steady. Email marketing is the corporate version of making out. Mileage Plus is the corporate version of petting to climax.
31. Networked markets can change suppliers overnight. Networked knowledge workers can change employers over lunch. Your own "downsizing initiatives" taught us to ask the question: "Loyalty? What's that?"	31. Networked markets can change pajamas overnight. Networked knowledge workers can change their shorts over lunch. Your own "downsizing initiatives" taught us to ask the question: "Anyone see my Crocs?"
32. Smart markets will find suppliers who speak their own language.	32. Smart markets will find suppliers with good seats at Laker games.
33. Learning to speak with a human voice is not a parlor trick. It can't be "picked up" at some tony conference.	33. Learning to speak with a human voice is not a parlor trick. Unless you're a ventriloquist or something.
34. To speak with a human voice, companies must share the concerns of their communities.	34. To speak with a human voice, companies must not pretend to be chipmunks like that stupid Christmas song.
35. But first, they must belong to a community.	35. But first, they must belong to a "Gentlemen's Club," if you get my drift.
36. Companies must ask themselves where their corporate cultures end.	36. Companies must ask themselves where their corporate cultures end. And also where the damn stapler went.
37. If their cultures end before the community begins, they will have no market.	37. If their cultures end before the holiday season they'll be sorry because that's when all the fun starts.
38. Human communities are based on discourse-- human speech about human concerns.	38. Human communities are based mostly on whining. Especially communities with manifestos.
39. The community of discourse is the market.	39. The community of discourse is the market. Or haven't we hit you over the head with this enough yet?
40. Companies that do not belong to a community of discourse will die.	40. Companies that do not belong to a community of discourse will die. Or at least get a rotator cuff injury and need an MRI.
41. Companies make a religion of security, but this is largely a red herring. Most are protecting less against competitors than against their own market and workforce.	41. Companies make a religion of security, but this is largely a red herring. Most are protecting less against competitors than against those guys selling magazine subscriptions.
42. As with networked markets, people are also talking to each other directly inside the company -- and not just about rules and regulations, boardroom directives, bottom lines.	42. As with networked markets, people are also talking to each other directly inside the company -- and not just about rules and regulations, boardroom directives, bottom lines. Also about recipes, and those Viagra emails, and Tiger. What's up with him?
43. Such conversations are taking place today on corporate intranets. But only when the conditions are right.	43. Such conversations are taking place today on corporate intranets. But only when the phone system is down.
44. Companies typically install intranets top-down to distribute HR policies and other corporate information that workers are doing their best to ignore.	44. Companies typically ride around in convertibles with the top-down, which is silly unless you don't care about how your hair looks.
45. Intranets naturally tend to route around boredom. The best are built bottom-up by engaged individuals cooperating to construct something far more valuable: an intranetworked corporate conversation.	45. Intranets naturally tend to route around the bedroom. Sometimes the people in these bedrooms are engaged individuals. Sometimes they're married. Sometimes they're just getting one off.
46. A healthy intranet organizes workers in many meanings of the word. Its effect is more radical than the agenda of any union.	46. A healthy intranet organizes workers in many meanings of the word. What word? I don't know.
47. While this scares companies witless, they also depend heavily on open intranets to generate and share critical knowledge. They need to resist the urge to "improve" or control these networked conversations.	47. While this scares companies witless, it doesn't scare them as much as watching Wolf Blitzer, or renting an Olds Alero.
48. When corporate intranets are not constrained by fear and legalistic rules, the type of conversation they encourage sounds remarkably like the conversation of the networked marketplace.	48. When corporate intranets are not constrained by fear and legalistic rules, the type of conversation they encourage sounds remarkably like the pompous bullshit we're putting out right here.
49. Org charts worked in an older economy where plans could be fully understood from atop steep management pyramids and detailed work orders could be handed down from on high.	49. Org charts worked in an older economy where Pharoahs lived in steep pyramids and got high.
50. Today, the org chart is hyperlinked, not hierarchical. Respect for hands-on knowledge wins over respect for abstract authority.	50. Today, the org chart is hyperlinked, not hierarchical. Respect for hands-on knowledge wins over respect for abstract authority. That's why Steve Jobs has to take so much shit from receptionists and software engineers, poor bastard.
51. Command-and-control management styles both derive from and reinforce bureaucracy, power tripping and an overall culture of paranoia.	51. Command-and-control management styles both derive from and reinforce bureaucracy, power tripping, an overall culture of paranoia, and everything else that's wrong with the world and I'm gonna hold my breath until they stop doing that.
52. Paranoia kills conversation. That's its point. But lack of open conversation kills companies.	52. Raid kills bugs fast.
53. There are two conversations going on. One inside the company. One with the market.	53. There are two conversations going on. How am I supposed to read? Would you please be quiet. And turn down that damn stereo.
54. In most cases, neither conversation is going very well. Almost invariably, the cause of failure can be traced to obsolete notions of command and control.	54. In most cases, neither conversation is going very well. Especially the one about lending money to your brother.
55. As policy, these notions are poisonous. As tools, they are broken. Command and control are met with hostility by intranetworked knowledge workers and generate distrust in internetworked markets.	55. As policy, these notions are poisonous. As tools, they are broken. Command and control are met with hostility by intranetworked knowledge workers and generate distrust in internetworked markets. And also in interior-networked nutella worknuts and indo-worknetted net-interworkers.
56. These two conversations want to talk to each other. They are speaking the same language. They recognize each other's voices.	56. These two conversations want to talk to each other. They recognize each other's voices. They sing the same songs. They dance in the moonlight. They fly on gossamer wings. They love, and love to be loved. They find meaning in meaning, and nothing in nothingness. They chant beneath the stars and write infantile horseshit.
57. Smart companies will get out of the way and help the inevitable to happen sooner.	57. Smart companies will get out of the way and let doofuses who speak in pathetic connect-o-babble take over.
58. If willingness to get out of the way is taken as a measure of IQ, then very few companies have yet wised up.	58. If willingness to get out of the way is taken as a measure of sperm count, then very few companies are having nocturnal emissions.
59. However subliminally at the moment, millions of people now online perceive companies as little more than quaint legal fictions that are actively preventing these conversations from intersecting.	59. However subliminally at the moment, millions of people now online perceive companies as little more than quaint legal fictions that are actively preventing these conversations from intersecting. Except when they want to buy something. Then they like these companies just fine.
60. This is suicidal. Markets want to talk to companies.	60. This is suicidal. Markets want to talk to companies. But if the phone is busy, sometimes they just send a 'thank you' card or a handwritten note, which I always think is a nice touch.
61. Sadly, the part of the company a networked market wants to talk to is usually hidden behind a smokescreen of hucksterism, of language that rings false -- and often is.	61. Sadly, the part of the company a networked market wants to talk to is the good looking babes stuck in some rotten cubicle doing Excel spreadsheets.
62. Markets do not want to talk to flacks and hucksters. They want to participate in the conversations going on behind the corporate firewall.	62. Markets do not want to talk to flacks and hucksters. They want those hot babes and they want 'em now.
63. De-cloaking, getting personal: We are those markets. We want to talk to you.	63. De-cloaking, getting personal: We are those markets. We are the world. We are the children. (C'mon everyone!) We are the ones who make a brighter day, so let's start giving...
64. We want access to your corporate information, to your plans and strategies, your best thinking, your genuine knowledge. We will not settle for the 4-color brochure, for web sites chock-a-block with eye candy but lacking any substance.	64. We want access to your corporate information, to your plans and strategies, your wives, your daughters, your liquor cabinet, your stash. And could you front us twenty till Friday?
65. We're also the workers who make your companies go. We want to talk to customers directly in our own voices, not in platitudes written into a script.	65. We're also the workers who make your companies go. (How? We put Metamucil in the Crystal Geyser. Dude!)
66. As markets, as workers, both of us are sick to death of getting our information by remote control. Why do we need faceless annual reports and third-hand market research studies to introduce us to each other?	66. As markets, as workers, both of us are sick to death of getting our information by remote control. Why can't we just get together over a drink and then, I don't know, we could go to my place or something?
67. As markets, as workers, we wonder why you're not listening. You seem to be speaking a different language.	67. As markets, as workers, we wonder why you're not listening. Is it because we're so fucking annoying?
68. The inflated self-important jargon you sling around -- in the press, at your conferences -- what's that got to do with us?	68. The inflated self-important jargon you sling around -- it's kid stuff compared to this horseshit.
69. Maybe you're impressing your investors. Maybe you're impressing Wall Street. You're not impressing us.	69. Maybe you're impressing your investors. Maybe you're impressing Wall Street. You're not impressing us. But if we could borrow your Beemer for the weekend, that would be like totally impressive.
70. If you don't impress us, your investors are going to take a bath. Don't they understand this? If they did, they wouldn't let you talk that way.	70. If you don't impress us, your investors are going to take a bath. Maybe we will, too. Do we smell bad? Seriously...?
71. Your tired notions of "the market" make our eyes glaze over. We don't recognize ourselves in your projections -- perhaps because we know we're already elsewhere.	71. Your tired notions of "the market" make our eyes glaze over. And our noses run. And that gooey stuff to accumulate between our toes.
72. We like this new marketplace much better. In fact, we are creating it.	72. We like this new marketplace much better. In fact, we are creating it. And you're not invited. And if you tell mom, I'll kill you.
73. You're invited, but it's our world. Take your shoes off at the door. If you want to barter with us, get down off that camel!	73. You're invited, but it's our world. Take off your shoes. Get down off that camel. And clean up your room young lady.
74. We are immune to advertising. Just forget it.	74. We are immune to advertising. This iPhone? It's my cousin's.
75. If you want us to talk to you, tell us something. Make it something interesting for a change.	75. If you want us to talk to you, you must be very, very lonely.
76. We've got some ideas for you too: some new tools we need, some better service. Stuff we'd be willing to pay for. Got a minute?	76. We've got some ideas for you too: but we're not going to tell because it's for us to know and you to find out!
77. You're too busy "doing business" to answer our email? Oh gosh, sorry, gee, we'll come back later. Maybe.	77. You're too busy "doing business" to answer our email? Well, okay, if you don't want the 70 million dollars you won in the Ethiopian lottery, than too bad for you!
78. You want us to pay? We want you to pay attention.	78. You want us to pay? We want you to pay attention. Look at me when I'm talking to you!
79. We want you to drop your trip, come out of your neurotic self-involvement, join the party.	79. We want you to drop your trip, come out of your neurotic self-involvement, join the party. And maybe you can bring some beer. And not that cheap Pabst crap, either.
80. Don't worry, you can still make money. That is, as long as it's not the only thing on your mind.	80. Don't worry, you can still make money. That is, as long as you don't hire morons like us.
81. Have you noticed that, in itself, money is kind of one-dimensional and boring? What else can we talk about?	81. Have you noticed that, in itself, money is kind of one-dimensional and boring? Remind you of anyone?
82. Your product broke. Why? We'd like to ask the guy who made it. Your corporate strategy makes no sense. We'd like to have a chat with your CEO. What do you mean she's not in?	82. Your product broke. Why? I'll tell you why. Because I tried to stick my wife's cat in it and he started screeching and biting. And we'd like to dance with your CEO. What do you mean she doesn't slow dance?
83. We want you to take 50 million of us as seriously as you take one reporter from The Wall Street Journal.	83. We want you to take 50 million of us as seriously as you take one reporter from The Wall Street Journal.  And 100 million of us as seriously as...let's see...3 reporters... no 2 reporters..
84. We know some people from your company. They're pretty cool online. Do you have any more like that you're hiding? Can they come out and play?	84. We know some people from your company. We've seen videos of them online. You think you could fix us up? I can borrow my mom's Windstar.
85. When we have questions we turn to each other for answers. If you didn't have such a tight rein on "your people" maybe they'd be among the people we'd turn to.	85. When we have questions we turn to each other for answers. That's why we're so fucking stupid.
86. When we're not busy being your "target market," many of us are your people. We'd rather be talking to friends online than watching the clock. That would get your name around better than your entire million dollar web site. But you tell us speaking to the market is Marketing's job.	86. When we're not busy being your "target market," many of us are your people. We'd rather be talking to friends online than watching the clock. Actually, we'd rather be doing anything online because online is the only place we can criticize everything and everyone without anyone seeing what hopeless wankers we are.
87. We'd like it if you got what's going on here. That'd be real nice. But it would be a big mistake to think we're holding our breath.	87. We'd like it if you got what's going on here. You just don't get it, do you? Do you?
88. We have better things to do than worry about whether you'll change in time to get our business. Business is only a part of our lives. It seems to be all of yours. Think about it: who needs whom?	88. We have better things to do than worry about whether you'll change in time to get our business. We're doing a World of Warcarft all-nighter. Wanna come over?
89. We have real power and we know it. If you don't quite see the light, some other outfit will come along that's more attentive, more interesting, more fun to play with.	89. We have real power and we know it. Don't let this pitiful whining fool you.
90. Even at its worst, our newfound conversation is more interesting than most trade shows, more entertaining than any TV sitcom, and certainly more true-to-life than the corporate web sites we've been seeing.	90. Even at its worst, our newfound conversation is more interesting than...I don't know...reciting the periodic table five times backwards?
91. Our allegiance is to ourselves -- our friends, our new allies and acquaintances, even our sparring partners. Companies that have no part in this world, also have no future.	91. Our allegiance is to ourselves -- and to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands...
92. Companies are spending billions of dollars on Y2K. Why can't they hear this market timebomb ticking? The stakes are even higher.	92. Companies are spending billions of dollars on Y2K. Why can't they buy us a beer? Just one. Is that too much to ask? Oh, and maybe a sandwich. Nothing fancy. Tuna or something? And no olives.
93. We're both inside companies and outside them. The boundaries that separate our conversations look like the Berlin Wall today, but they're really just an annoyance. We know they're coming down. We're going to work from both sides to take them down.	93. We're both inside companies and outside them. That's why there's that smell.
94. To traditional corporations, networked conversations may appear confused, may sound confusing. But we are organizing faster than they are. We have better tools, more new ideas, no rules to slow us down.	94. To traditional corporations, networked conversations may appear confused, may sound confusing. But we are organizing faster than they are. We have better tools, nicer pencils cases, and watches that can tell the time in three different time zones. Wanna see?
95. We are waking up and linking to each other. We are watching. But we are not waiting.	95. We are waking up and linking to each other. Then we are having strawberry Toaster Strudel and going back to sleep. Please don't slam the door.

Happy New Year. 
See you in January.

Threat Level Purple

Here at TAC global headquarters, we try to stay as far away from politics and world events as possible. But since it's Christmas-New Years week and nobody's reading blogs anyway, what the hell...

The incompetence of our so-called "homeland security" system is breathtaking to behold.

The guy who almost blew up a plane over Detroit last week...

• was reported to Nigerian authorities as a possible terrorist by his father
• was then reported to the American embassy in Nigeria as a possible terrorist by his father
• was on a US government list of possible terrorists
• was on a watchlist in the UK because his visa application had been denied
• checked no luggage for a supposed 2-week trip from Nigeria to Detroit
• paid for his ticket in cash

This lunatic did everything but wear a sign saying "I'm a terrorist" and we still didn't stop him.

But hold it -- he had a diabolically clever way of getting his bomb on the plane.  He put it in his underwear. Talk about your criminal fucking geniuses!

We have spent over 40 billion dollars on airport security.  We have thousands of TSA agents. The result? We can't even find a bomb in some idiot's underwear.

I can spend 30 minutes in any airport in America and take pictures of TSA agents standing around doing nothing; sitting around talking on cell phones; annoying the shit out of old ladies in wheelchairs; joking with colleagues; and walking around with clipboards trying to discover who's on break and who isn't.

We don't need bullshit congressional hearings or bullshit blue ribbon panels to fix this.

Everyone involved in the current management of "homeland security" needs to be fired and we need to start over. This time with cops, not lawyers.

Follow-up...
...The New York Times reported later today ...

Two officials said the government had intelligence from Yemen before Friday that leaders of a branch of Al Qaeda there were talking about “a Nigerian” being prepared for a terrorist attack. While the information did not include a name, officials said it would have been evident had it been compared to information about Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the 23-year-old Nigerian charged with trying to blow up a Northwest Airlines flight to Detroit on Christmas Day. 

The government also had more information about where Mr. Abdulmutallab had been and what some of his plans were.

These morons are lucky nobody died or there would be mobs in the street calling for their heads.

How About the "Terrorist Differentness Ecosystem Dashboard?"

Regular readers know I like to divide the people of the ad world into two species: simplifiers and complicators.

This also applies to the non-advertising world.

I evaluate the potential efficacy of social and political activities by whether they are making things more simple or more complicated.  Generally, things that make the world simpler succeed, and things that make the world more complicated fail.

This was called to mind this weekend when a God-inspired maniac tried to blow up an airplane over Detroit.

Apparently this guy's father specifically warned officials about his son's proclivities just a few weeks ago. The warning was ignored. As I was reading an article from The Washington Post a phrase caught my eye.

"...Administration officials acknowledged Saturday that Abdulmutallab's (the maniac's) name was added in November to the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment... maintained by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence at the National Counterterrorism Center..."

The Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment? The list of homicidal psychopaths who want to blow us up is called the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment? Are you fucking kidding me?

That's all you need to know about it to know that it will be a massive failure.

If you wanted to, could you possibly invent a more stupid, complicated, bullshit name? Assuming the idiots who named this thing are the same idiots who are running it, it has no chance of success. None.

Look at the hierarchy delineated in that paragraph:

The Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment
of the
Office of the Director of National Intelligence
at the
National Counterterrorism Center

It sounds like a Rube Goldberg comedy version of mealy-mouthed governmental uselessness.

You want a data base that will generate some results? Call it the List of Murderous Lunatics Who Are Trying To Kill Us.

The "National Terrorism Center"...
Sounds like it has a Starbucks, a Banana Republic, and a Barnes and Noble.

Hack Attack

Someone hacked my blog, posted stuff, erased all comments, and sent emails from my account. If you received anything you weren't expecting from me, delete it.

The Sky Is Falling. This Time We Mean It.

Since the dawn of civilization, it’s been pretty clear that you can make a nice living predicting the end of the world.

While "experts" have been predicting it with great regularity for thousands of years, so far we're still here drinking coffee and reading blogs.

One of the interesting things about this decade has been the impressive increase in the amount of media hysteria and the depressing increase in the credulousness of the public.

Here at TAC global headquarters, we thought it would be fun to find out what your favorite "sky is falling" story of the decade was.

The Social Media Contradiction

If you are inclined to believe The World's Most Unscientific Social Media Survey, which we conducted here last week, then there is something very interesting going on.

What's happening is that all the hype about social media is working. 

Social media evangelists have been very successful at convincing marketers that they need to engage in social media despite the fact that those who have been engaged in it are, for the most part, disappointed in the results they've gotten.

Among those who say they have been using social media, only 6% said the results exceeded their expectations.  Only 10% said they felt social media dollars were as productive as traditional ad dollars. And a mere 25% of marketers said they were willing to re-direct ad dollars to social media.

29% of respondents characterized social media as "a valuable tool that every marketer should be using" while 70% said it was "an over-hyped, unproven medium" or "a waste of time and money."

But their negative attitudes about social media aren't affecting their behavior.

88% of agency people say they talk as much or more about social media in new business pitches as they did 6 months ago. Only 12% said they are doing less social media than they were 6 months ago. Only 6% said it's harder to sell social media to clients than it was 6 months ago. A mere 15% said their clients' interest in social media is waning.

To me, this is very reminiscent of the blog and podcast scare of a few years ago.  If you remember, it was impossible to go into a client meeting without having a blog or podcast recommendation. If you didn't, clients thought you were out of it. So even though you knew it was a huge wack-off (is there an "h" in wack-off?) you had to recommend it, just to look cool.

Disclaimers, qualifiers, and weasel words...
The World's Most Unscientific Social Media Survey was, in fact, well-named. At 200, the sample size was way too small (yet 25 times the size of the average focus group.) Respondents were neither chosen at random nor fairly balanced. And it would be my guess that readers of The Ad Contrarian would tend to be more skeptical about social media than average.

And yet...being around research as long as I have, you develop a nose for what's real and what's bullshit. While the methodology here is bullshit, I have a feeling the conclusions are real.

Something Else To Give Social Media Zealots Heartburn
According to this study, email is seven times more popular for sharing "content" than Twitter.

Decade of the Decade

Good news.

Only 10 more days until all the Bullshit of the Decade stuff goes away.

No more Man of the Decade, or Movie of the Decade, or Agency of the Decade, or Cheesecake of the Decade for another 10 years.

No more App of the Decade, or Spot of the Decade, or Widget of the Decade.

No more Golfer of the Decade, or Song of the Decade, or Woman of the Decade, or Story of the Decade.

All that's left to name is the Decade of the Decade.

I nominate any fucking decade but this one.

Bulletin...Bulleting...Bulletin

Zany Zeros Named "Decade Of The Decade"

The organization Media Morons Who Do This Kind Of Stuff  have named The Zany Zeros "Decade of the Decade."

Judges cited the fact that since the year 2000, no other decade has produced as much innovation, golf jokes, exploding people, Ethiopian lottery winners, things-that-were-supposed-to-kill-us-all, or vitamin water.

The importance of this announcement can be measured by the fact that it has been 10 years since another decade was named "Decade of the Decade."

Other nominees for "Decade of the Decade" included The Swinging Sixties (which were disqualified because they happened fifty years ago) and The Terrible Teens (which haven't happened yet but have to be better than this pile of crap.)

A 3-hour Awards Show, "The Zany Zeros: Decade of the Decade," hosted by Wolf Blitzer, will be Twittered live on New Years Eve.

Tomorrow...
...some eye-opening results from the World's Most Unscientific Social Media Survey. There's still time to take the survey here.

World's Most Unscientific Social Media Survey

In our continuing efforts to provide our readers with the most up-to-date and technologically advanced opinions masquerading as facts, The Ad Contrarian is happy to announce our end-of-year World's Most Unscientific Social Media Survey.

This year our survey will be on the hottest marketing topic of the year -- social media. Please complete (anonymously) our brief 9 question survey and we'll report the results back to you next week.

This survey has absolutely no scientific validity, but unlike other bullshit market research, we don't pretend it does.

Find the survey here.

Working On A Marriage

So Tiger Woods has given up golf for a while to work on his marriage.

I've always wondered how you work on a marriage.

Do you take it out to the garage and change the spark plugs? Do you bring it down to the basement and sand it? What the hell do you do?

It's been my experience that there are some things that can't be improved by trying to improve them. They can only be improved indirectly.

Like being happy. You can't be happy by trying to be happy. You can only be happy by playing your guitar too loud or drinking too much beer and going bowling. That'll make you happy. But try really hard to be happy and you're sure to end up miserable.

Same with marriage. You don't wind up with a good marriage by "working" on it. You do it by not working on it. By being naturally comfortable together and not bugging the shit out of each other.

Let's look in on a typical morning in the Woods household as they work on their marriage.

TIGER IS SLEEPING. ELIN COMES STORMING INTO THE BEDROOM AND SMACKS HIM ACROSS THE HEAD WITH A COPY OF US.

Elin: Hey asshole, look, another waitress says you're a good lay.

Tiger: Um...honey...I thought we agreed that we had to get beyond the...

Elin:  Go fuck yourself.

As we can see, the first 30 seconds of working on the marriage probably don't go so well. Then you have like -- I don't know -- either 40 more years of it or 40 more days.

Either way, if Tiger thought working on his putting was tough, he ain't seen nothin'.


Recommended reading...
...don't miss this.

The Malignant Cumulative Effect of Tiny Misdemeanors

Last week, the 2009 Bully Award for Outstanding Achievement in Advertising and Marketing Bullshit -- the Turd d'Or -- went to the "Breathtaking" Pepsi design document.

It's hard to understand how something like this comes into being, but I think I've figured it out.

I call it "the malignant cumulative effect of tiny misdemeanors."

Baseball provides us a good example. For years baseball players were taking steroids. Everyone who cared to know, knew. The owners knew. The players knew. The league knew. The press knew. The interested public knew. Everyone knew and nobody cared. There was a tacit agreement -- you didn't say it out loud.

Then one day, it changed. Someone said it out loud. Steroid use in baseball became exposed to the clear light of day.  Suddenly, everyone was outraged. The public was shocked. The owners were scandalized. The press was indignant.

It must have mystified the players. Until then, they had probably thought of steroid use as nothing more than a technical misdemeanor that everyone knew about and winked at.

The same happens in business. You make a presentation. You know there's a little piece of it that's bullshit. But it goes well. No one calls you on the bullshit and you see that it makes for a nice pitch.

So next time you embellish it a little. And again, it goes well.

After a while, the bullshit metastasizes. And you keep getting more and more successful. Eventually, you lose track of what's bullshit and what isn't.

Pretty soon you're calling your presentation "Breathtaking." You're talking about "perimeter oscillations" and "emotive forces shap(ing) the gestalt of brand identity" and "brand identity...dimensionalized through motion" and the "establishment of a gravitional pull to shift from a 'transactional' experience to an 'invitational' expression" and you're making preposterous statements about cans of soda and the "relativity of space and time."

And, amazingly, it's still all going great.

Then one day the context changes. Your lovely line of patter appears somewhere it's not supposed to appear. It gets exposed to a new standard of reality.

What seemed brilliant in the cloistered confines of corporate conference rooms is revealed as ludicrous and laughable in the clear light of day.

In tiny, imperceptible increments you have gone from brilliant visionary to preposterous bullshit artist.

Tail Wagging Dog

Wendy's has been having lots of problems since its founder, Dave Thomas, died several years ago. They've been going through ad agencies faster than Tiger Woods goes through talcum powder.

Recently they had another agency review. If my count is right, that makes about fifty in four years.

It seems these days an agency can't win a new account without presenting a seriously demented social media scheme. (Like we're always saying here at Ad Contrarian global headquarters, there's no bigger sucker than a gullible marketer convinced he's missing a trend.)

If you haven't seen the alarmingly stupid Wendy's Realtime site, you're in for a treat. How anyone can spend more than 30 seconds on this monstrosity is beyond belief. Why anyone would is even more mind-boggling.

What it seems to do is capture tweets and other digital inanities and post them in real time. Until you've experienced it you can't really appreciate how remarkably dumb it is.

In a recent article in a trade pub, the managing director of the agency had this to say about the site,

"...we're trying to reflect on what our targets are interested in, and if it was only Wendy's it would be less interesting"

Less interesting? Sorry, not possible.

Based on the minute I spent on the site before my brains fell out, their target seems frighteningly interested in bacon. Now, it is possible that, heaven forbid, Wendy's is fudging by screening for words that they -- not their target -- are interested in.

In which case the theme of the site -- You Know When It's Real -- is  stunningly cynical.

According to the article, this guy also

...declined to provide visitor traffic or engagement numbers, saying it's too early.

It's not too early for me*. This thing is an all-too-typical dimwitted social media whack-a-thon. I can only imagine how the agency is spinning this expensive nonsense to the client.

The sad thing is, the agency probably won the account on the "strength" of this brilliant digital idea.

The marketing world is now fully committed to the tail wagging the dog.


*Full-disclosure - Wendy's chief competitor, McDonald's, is a client of mine.

The Hypocrisy Machine

All the hand-wringing and hyperventilating about Tiger Woods gives me a big pain in the ass.

The truth is, the media is one big hypocrisy machine. They pretend they're shocked by this. But they know that every male movie star, athlete, politician, singer, tv star and media big shot who can, does.

The difference between Tiger Woods and your personal celebrity hero? Woods got caught.

Here are a few tips about listening to media nonsense on the subject of celebrity sexual misbehavior:

• If you have the feeling that all celebrities are screwing their pants off and you're missing out on something, you're dead right. 

• All male media commentators (yes, 100% of them) are full of shit when they get all huffy about celebrity sexual shenanigans. They know all about this stuff, they do it themselves, and they only become outraged when it goes public.

• Never listen to anything any female writer or commentator has to say about male sexuality. They don't have a hint of an inkling of a clue.

Like we said last week, give most men unlimited access to bimbos and they'll get in trouble every time. Maybe not as prolifically as Tiger, but just as sneakily

As my high school gym teacher used to say, "98% of all teenage boys masturbate. And 2% lie."

It's Friday. You Deserve A Good Laugh

Thanks to Sharon Krinsky for this.

Awards Of Merit

Earlier this week we awarded the Turd d'Or to the "Breathtaking" Pepsi design document.

In the course of evaluating all the entries for the 2009 Bully Awards there were a number of nominees worthy of merit.  I would like to review a few of them and add some commentary.

"It's About Understanding Conversations" 

This was our runner-up. One of the wonderful things about this entry was how the message and the messenger meshed so nicely.

As one commenter said, "That dude ... has my vote. What a d-bag. He deserved a smack down..."

About the actual content of the video, another commentor said, "It's... completely unbearable to watch. After 30 seconds you feel a sharp decline in 'will to live'..."

Here at TAC global headquarters, we hope this video serves as a cautionary example to those inclined to blather on about "conversations" and "brands." 

"Synergy-Related Headcount-Adjustment" 

This did not receive as much popular support as I thought it deserved. Personally, I found it to be just about the most perfect example of corporate pr bullshit I've ever encountered.

To call firing thousands of people a "synergy-related headcount-adjustment" is the work of an evil genius. As one commenter said, it was "...full of the most vile form of bullshit around."

The fact that it was attributed to two guys named Simon Beresford-Wylie and Bosco Novak made it even more delicious. Dickens could not have named them better.

"We Started On A Journey..." 

This was another entry that I thought would receive more support.

As I said upon first viewing the piece, when some designer starts his pitch as if he was scaling the fucking Himalayas instead of playing with crayons, you know there's some massive bullshit heading your way.

One other thing I particularly liked was this sentence, "..there was a strong drive to bring a big messaging on to the carton where the single biggest billboarding was..."

This is a wonderful example of a big breakthrough in bullshit in the past few years. Marketing geeks have taken the gerundive form and applied it to nouns instead of verbs. So while a gerund used to be a nice little trick to turn a verb into a noun, bullshit artists are now using it to turn a noun into another noun. Why a noun needs to be turned into another noun nobody knows except the knuckleheads who think it sounds fancy. Rarely do you see it twice in one sentence. I was impressed. 

Full Disclosure...
....I have to admit something here. I never watched the full "Windows 7 Launch Party" or the full "Saturn Novel Adventure." I'm not as tough as I pretend to be.

The Death Watch Continues

 From TechCrunch, November 2006 "Let's Just Declare TV Dead And Move On"

"...the writing is on the wall...at the end of the day, people want to consume content without the friction of having to sit down in front of a television at an appointed time....People want to see the whole show on YouTube. There is a fundamental shift in consumer behavior going on..."

Here at Ad Contrarian global headquarters we're still standing by, waiting for tv to go away and die.

It's been 5 years now. All the pundits and media geniuses have assured us tv is dead. All the web maniacs and new age marketing gurus have promised us it's dead. All the social media snake oil salesmen and ad agency bozos have guaranteed us it's dead.

Apparently, the only people who aren't convinced of this are the viewing public.

According to Nielsen's* "Three Screen Report," published on Monday, in the 3rd quarter of 2009...

• 99% of all video viewing was done on a TV
• A tiny 1.6% of video viewing was done via a DVR (TiVo)
• An even tinier 1.2% of video viewing was done on a computer. (This includes all viral videos, YouTube, Hulu, Vimeo, and every porn site your kid visits)
• An infinitesimal .2% of video viewing was done on a mobile device (cell phone, iPod, etc)
  

Here's a little pie chart for account planners, digital marketing mavens, bloggers and others who don't read so well and don't know a fact from a fart:

Golly, folks. If I didn't know better, I'd think that maybe the experts, geniuses, and web hustlers don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

*Thanks to Michael Gass.

Tiger's "Escalade Escapade": It's Our Fault

All bad behavior can be traced to advertising. If we just eliminated advertising there would be no more screwing, no more smoking, no more drinking, no more fat people, no more skinny people...

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the reason Tiger Woods couldn't keep Little Eldrick in his pants, is because of us:

"The simplest explanation of Tiger Woods' current predicament had nothing to do with lust, marital betrayal or fallen idols. It described the crafting of an icon and the takeover of sports by corporate advertising."

Right.

Tiger's the victim in this. We're the bad guys. We kidnapped every bimbo in Vegas, gave them all boob jobs,  dangled them naked in front of Tiger and ordered him to "just do it." Our bad.

By the way, the only people not surprised by the Tiger Woods' Escalade Escapade (trade mark pending) are Ad Contras.

We all learned back in October that Everybody Lies About Sex. This is particularly true of other women's husbands.

Give most men unlimited and unimpeded access to bimbos and they'll get in trouble every time. It ain't pretty, but there it is.

The saving grace is that about 1 man in a million has unlimited and unimpeded access to bimbos. That's why all the rest are trying to be Tiger Woods.

And Speaking of Escalades...
...what kind of extravaganza requires 1,200 limos and 140 private jets? That's right, the climate summit. "We're having to drive them (limos) in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden," says one limo company owner. And the private jets? "...the planes will have to fly off to regional airports – or to Sweden – to park, returning to Copenhagen to pick up their VIP passengers." If these idiot politicians had set out to undermine their cause and make themselves look like irresponsible hypocrites they couldn't have done a better job.

Probably advertising's fault.

Big Thanks...
...to Ben over at excellent blog If This Is A Blog Then What's Christmas for naming The Ad Contrarian one of the 10 best ad blogs of the decade.

Also, If You're Not Reading...
... Ad Aged and The Grumpy Brit you should be.

The 2009 Bully Award Winner Is...

The 2009 Bully Award for Outstanding Achievement in Advertising and Marketing Bullshit -- the Turd d'Or -- goes to the "Breathtaking" Pepsi design document.

Several months ago, when this document became public, I got a nice chuckle out of it, as did many advertising and marketing people.

Recently, in reviewing the nominees for the Bully Awards, I had the opportunity to take a closer look at it.

With the perspective that a few months affords, I have a new appreciation for the document. Not as an article of business communication, but as an artifact of an industry so totally engulfed in madness that this piece of lunacy may very well live on as the marketing icon of our era.

For years I have been at odds with myself. On one hand, my life-long smart-ass instincts have brought me to the point where I sometimes believe that the whole of contemporary marketing and advertising erudition is a cruel joke -- a bunch of baloney wrapped-up in fancy lingo masquerading as a body of knowledge.

On the other hand, I have wondered whether it's just my compulsion to be a contrarian that leads me to this conclusion. Maybe I'm just constitutionally unable to be reasonable and accept what I don't agree with.

The Pepsi document gives me clarity about this and secretly makes me happy.

Here we have an arm of one of the world's leading marketing communications enterprises (Omnicom) and one of the world's leading marketing companies (PepsiCo) embracing a document of such alarming preposterousness that if you presented it to a group of half-bright 14-year olds they'd laugh you out of the room.

And yet, apparently, this drivel was approved at the highest levels of two of the world's leading marketing organizations.

Wasn't there someone to say "Wait a minute?" Wasn't there someone to say, "What?" Wasn't there someone to say, "Huh?"

Wasn't there someone who giggled when he heard about "emotive forces (that) shape the gestalt of brand identity?" Wasn't there someone who snickered when she heard about the "establishment of a gravitational pull to shift from a 'transactional' experience to an 'invitational' expression?" Wasn't there someone with the guts to ask what in the world redesigning a can of soda had to do with the "relativity of space and time?"

I am certain there are intelligent, clear-thinking people in both organizations. But it seems like the culture of large enterprises like Omnicom and PepsiCo are so saturated with the poison of group-think and boot-licking that no one has the balls to say, "are you fucking kidding me?"

Unfortunately, they are not alone. The marketing industry is a disaster. It is teeming with people who have memorized some words but can't think straight. It is reliant on cliches and mind-numbing jargon instead of clearly defined principles. It is increasingly populated by frauds, poseurs and sycophants. 

It's not just the emperor that has no clothes. It's the whole fucking empire.

I'm Still Shaking

Last Saturday I was in New York City. I was on the subway, on the "A" train, with my wife. She was exiting at 59th St. and I was continuing uptown.

There was a lunatic in our car belittling people and demanding money. I decided that when my wife exited at 59th, I would exit also and move to the next car. Then I hesitated and chastised myself for being a coward. Finally, I decided to change cars.

As I entered the new car I saw an open seat. I headed for it.

The doors were closing. Suddenly a man jumped up from his seat. He had his 6-year old son by the arm. The boy had a tiny kid-size rolling suitcase in tow.

The man had obviously missed his stop. He blocked the door and jumped out onto the platform. The door continued to close. He still had the boy by the arm.

The kid fell. Most of him fell onto the platform, but his leg fell between the platform and the train. The door was closing.

I saw this in vivid, horrifying slow motion. I ran to the door and held it. I grabbed the boy's leg and pulled it up from the gap. I pushed him onto the platform and threw his rollie out after him. The door closed and the train pulled away. It all happened in a second.

I stood there shaking.

Some people are just too fucking stupid to be parents.


Monday...
...we award the Turd d'Or -- the 2009 Bully Award for Outstanding Achievement in Advertising and Marketing Bullshit.

Delusional Branding Campaigns and Me

Marketing people and companies go on and on about brands. Unfortunately, most have little to no clue about how powerful brands are actually built. They think you do it with "branding" campaigns.

At some point, every too-big company gets the irresistible urge to do one of these branding campaigns.

As far as I’m concerned, this is just fine.

The branding campaign will be a bit of innocuous blather . No animals will be harmed. No products will be sold. Some big dumb agency will make a nice piece of change. Some media reps will keep their jobs for another six months. And a bunch of actors, photographers, and maybe even a few musicians will have a nice payday. So far, so good.

Sadly, there's a downside. Somewhere along the line, someone will decide that what the  campaign needs to say is that the company is just like me.

Sometimes their personality is just like me. Sometimes they understand me. Sometimes they even are me.

Now, I know me better than they do. And one thing I know for sure is that these companies are nothing like me. They don't eat really big meatball sandwiches like me. They don't do crossword puzzles at 3 a.m. like me. And they don't hate Whoopi Goldberg like me.

Right now, there are three too-big companies who’ve decided that they are just like me.

Yahoo! has my personality. And HTC cell phones "get" me. And Microsoft thinks they are me.

So here’s a tip for too-big companies planning to do a branding campaign.

I know and understand why your campaign is going to be a cliché-ridden, pointless, smelly pile of doody. That’s what most branding campaigns are. That’s fine. I've got no problem with that. It’s good for the economy. Go ahead and do it.

But, please, leave me the hell out of it.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

10 Ideas For Transforming Advertising

Yesterday, we received the following email from the head of the 4A's.

Are You A Transformer?

Dear Bob,

Like you, I’m tired of hearing from the same industry thought leaders talking about the same so-called thought-leading things at industry conferences. What I really want is to hear from you: If you had just five minutes in front of the entire advertising community, what would you say about transforming advertising as we know it?

I’ve started a new program called 4A’s Transformers, and we’ve just opened up our call for entries for anyone—inside or outside advertising—to share his or her transformational idea about advertising. For winning Transformers, we’ll give you five minutes on the conference mainstage at Transformation 2010, our annual meeting, which will be held February 28 through March 3, 2010, at the Hilton San Francisco Union Square.

What’s the catch? There is no catch. I’ll pick up the tab for your travel and hotel stay at the conference (roundtrip coach airfare and one-night at the Hilton). All you need to do is dazzle me (and the 4A’s Board of Directors) with your brilliant idea for transforming advertising.

Deadline for entries is Tuesday, January 12, 2010. Click here for contest details.

You’ve been blogging or twittering about what you’d do if you were in charge for years. Now’s your chance! What are you waiting for?

Here at Ad Contrarian global headquarters, we always welcome a challenge. So here we go...

10 Ideas For Transforming Advertising

1. No cranberry bagels at meetings. No exceptions.

2. While on duty, copywriters required to wear those Norwegian knit hats with the funny earflaps.

3. Reinstatement of the three martini lunch. After a 6-month trial period, optional upgrade to four.

4. Confiscate all computers and baseball caps from art directors.

5. Use of the following terms considered justifiable cause for termination: ecosystem, conversation, engagement, branding, quirky, landscape, seared ahi tuna and dashboard.

6. When making presentations, account planners must dress up as pirates and hop around on one foot.

7. Breakthrough idea for tv spots: Animals that talk!

8. Criminalize all products containing pomegranates or acai berries.

9.  Increase touch points from 360 degrees to 380 degrees.

10. Require Sir Martin Sorrell to walk around with his weenie out.
                                                                                                                                                                          

Tabulating The Results

I am happy to report that the preliminary voting for the 2009 Bully Awards for Outstanding Achievement in Advertising and Marketing Bullshit is nearly completed. Here's where the leading candidates stand at this time along with their percentage of the votes.

1. Pepsi "Breathtaking" logo document          38%
2, Understanding conversations                      25%
3. Windows 7 launch party                             15%
4. Build a brand in 30 days                              5%
5. Hal Riney is spinning                                  4%
6. We started on a journey                               4%
7. Headcount reductions                                  3%
8. 100 ways to measure social media              3%
9. When planners write ads                             1%
10. The conversation economy                       1%

Later this week, a brown ribbon panel of judges will meet, count the final votes, and finalize this year's winner of the Turd d'Or. You still have a few hours to vote.

Be sure to stay tuned to learn the winner of the 2009 Bully Award.


Matt Winston

I’ve had the good fortune to meet a lot of very smart people in my life. Matt Winston was among the smartest.

Matt could talk to you intelligently about virtually any topic imaginable, and usually had a point of view about it you had never considered.

A polymath and an autodidact, remarkably, he taught himself both Russian and Japanese.

Along with his wife Kazuko, he raised two of the finest kids I know --  my nephew Theo and my niece Aya.

Matt died last weekend after a brief but difficult battle with leukemia.

RIP Matt Winston.