Source: whenatyahoo
Accusations Fly When You're Having Internet
TED was accused this week of “censoring” a talk addressing income inequality. After an aggressive social media backlash, the organization was forced to explain why they hadn’t publicized this particular speech—turns out it just wasn’t very good, and even TED’s liberal-leaning audience didn’t receive it well.
What’s a better story? “Organization unable to give extra publicity to every speech declines to feature talk that got lukewarm reception,” or, “Organization claiming to support intellectualism and thoughtfulness instead busily censoring talks that promote controversial concepts?” Obviously, the latter is more interesting—more tweet-worthy, more infuriating, and a much better subject for a press release.
When you hear a story about an organization with a good reputation behaving shockingly, astoundingly badly, stop before you retweet and compare the known facts to the known spin. In this case, the only known fact was: TED didn’t post a talk about income inequality. Could there be other, less salacious reasons for that? When you think of it in that light, the “scandal” seems dubious, since the speaker produced nothing whatsoever to support his claim that the talk wasn’t posted because of its topic or slant, rather than because of its quality or value.
Too often, tempests-in-a-teapot on the Internet end up only damaging the innocent. In this case, TED has taken a mild hit to its brand, but, more importantly, people who are talking seriously about income inequality may be perceived as reactionary and irrational. Shame on the speaker who decided his talk’s publicity needs outweighed the value of his chosen cause.
Civil unions matter more than your Google results.
My state legislature is currently—as I type this—debating civil unions. Again. For those outside of Colorado, here’s a one-paragraph summary of the recent drama:
Civil union bill passes the Colorado Senate. Passes three committees, with one Republican on each voting for the bill. Speaker Frank McNulty adjourns the legislative session to avoid letting the bill get an up-or-down vote on the House floor, though not before Republicans (who hold the majority in Colorado) filibuster their own proceedings. Governor Hickenlooper calls a special legislative session to consider the bills left on the calendar due to the early adjournment. McNulty reacts by reporting to special session as instructed, but assigning civil unions to the “kill committee,” comprised of the legislators most obedient to the Speaker. Debate in that committee is happening now, and the bill is expected to die there.
So here we are. Again. Once again, the hearing is packed with people on both sides, and once again, gay parents testify to what civil unions would do to protect their children. Once again, people claiming to be on God’s side will testify as to why it’s important to deny those children—kids who didn’t choose their same-sex parents—those protections.
Here we are again, waiting to see these families crushed when, as expected, the “kill committee” does its job. And here we will likely be again next year, hoping that those families will finally be made something-resembling-equal under the law.
Two of the best people I know have two mothers each: One of my best friends and one of the best managers I ever expect to have. Both of them are already adults and made it there without the same protection that children of opposite-sex parents get. Both will watch their mothers age. I pray they don’t have to also watch them cope with the indignity of a healthier partner funneling end-of-life decisions through her son as a go-between because the law won’t grant the healthier woman the right to make decisions for her ill partner, just because that partner is a woman and not a man.
That matters more than whether or not at some tenuous time in the future this blog post offends a potential client, a possible employer, a friend, or a family member.
Your support for civil unions matters more than your Google results, too.
Barack Obama is on the record. Joe Biden is on the record. And if you support, at the very least, almost-equal rights for families headed by same-sex partners, you need to be on the record for it, too. Even, and especially, if you don’t look like a supporter. Especially if you’re straight, older, religious, a family man or woman yourself, and the people who oppose even almost-equal rights will otherwise assume you’re on their side.
Three Ways Your Marketing Should Be More Like This Cuttlefish
So, I have this cephalopod obsession.
I’m not gonna lie: It originally had nothing to do with inspiration or innovation, and everything to do with the fact that, at age 13, it was hella cool to prove an original hypothesis (“Cuttlefish will respond to human mimicry of their tentacle positions, using our ten fingers to imitate their ten tentacles”) by signing with the cuttlefish living in the Monterrey Bay Aquarium. Smitten by cuttlefish and their willingness to interact with a human being, I started consuming everything I could read about cephalopods.
Since getting into social media, communications, and marketing, I’ve adopted the class Cephalopoda as a totem of sorts—there are three in my cubicle, and I had custom cephalopod-themed thank you cards made via Etsy, which I send mostly to business contacts. Only recently did I sit down and really think about why I like to be surrounded by cephalopods as I work. As it turns out, they’re a pretty good metaphor for marketing in the rapidly changing world of high tech and digital media.
1. “Cold” or “Deep” Intelligence
Why don’t we think of the octopus as intelligent or emotive, like dogs or cats? Research on the Giant Pacific Octopus (some of it’s quoted here, and I’d be happy to forward the PDF sent to me by a leading researcher if anyone would like it via email) suggests that the culprit may be the “cold” intelligence of the octopus, as it contrasts with the “warm” intelligence of mammals. Octopodes are problem-solvers who are enormously intelligent; research even suggests they’re probably conscious. They might conceivably be smarter than humans.
But until recently, nobody was studying octopus intelligence. Why? Because we don’t relate to how they express their intelligence. Their worldview—that of a predator who must continually solve the problem of getting food on the ocean floor—is enormously different from our own, leaving little time for the gregarious and affectionate disposition we relate to in our mammalian pets. We’re stuck in our own perspective, with the priorities inherent in living as a social primate, and for thousands of years we failed to notice the intelligence of some of the most interesting animals on Earth. How much have we failed to learn about the ocean as a result?
Marketers and corporate communicators often fall into the trap of forgetting user experience when users’ priorities, life experiences, and the way they express their needs differ enormously from what’s visible on our side of the screen. How much are we failing to learn about how users or customers experience our products as a result?
2. Cuttlefish and Color-Blindness
Cuttlefish are beautifully colorful animals, changing their colors and patterns in response to environmental stimuli, including humans and other cuttlefish. But they don’t see their own camouflage in the same way we do. In fact, they’re color-blind. It turns out that, instead of color vision, cuttlefish have polarization vision—and the best such vision found in any animal species so far.
So, when cuttlefish communicate through altering the visuals displayed on their skin, we can’t see what they see, and they can’t see what we see. The message they’re sending is in polarized light, but the message we receive is in color. Communication still happens, remarkably enough, but not only are we speaking different languages, neither of us is biologically equipped to learn the other’s language.
In marketing, some of the biggest goofs come from a message sent in one language that’s received in another; take Groupon, for example, which recently sent a message in the language of startups—a message that excused a major mistake by blaming it on the newness of the company—without considering that it would be received in the language of investors, people who trust kinda-sorta-important matters like their retirement savings to the ability of companies to have their shit together by the time they go public, no matter how new they are. Anyone who’s worked for a startup speaks “Oh shit we did not just do that, did we?” but anyone in communications for a publicly traded company, even a startup, also needs to speak “Yes, you just did that, you morons, and it may mean my 401(k) is worth $10,000 less than it was yesterday.”
3. Humboldt Squid Turn Global Warming into World Domination
There won’t be a lot of winners in the animal kingdom if global warming continues. Especially not in the ocean, where a warming world could change just about everything most species rely on to obtain food, habitat, and other resources. The Humboldt squid, however, is already winning big. Its population is exploding, to the point that some areas have removed fishing limits for these squid entirely.
Why do squid win when the other guys lose? For one thing, the Humboldt squid eats most of the other guys. It’s not dependent on krill or fish populations to survive; whatever’s in abundance, the squid will learn to feed on it. Even other cephalopods might fall prey to these indiscriminate eaters. So, when any outside force throws the competition’s habits out of whack, Humboldt squid show up to decimate the remaining population. That benefits them twice: First, they get a meal, and second, they’re reducing the number of predators remaining to eat tiny Humboldt squid babies.
Marketing in a recession is a lot like living in the ocean during a period of global warming. If you’re a salmon, and in the business of swimming one way, spawning one way, and eating just a handful of things, you’re in trouble. If you’re a Humboldt squid, you’re dining on the salmon. Can your marketing plan “feed” on whatever remains abundant when times are tough, or are you dependent on a single source of success? How many markets do you “swim” in? The next time the economy contracts, will you be in the squid’s position, or the salmon’s?
A submission from Secretary Hillary Clinton.
Original image by Diana Walker for Time.
Source: textsfromhillaryclinton
The White House Project: A Call to Today's Girls: Be the Exception
Today is The Girl Scouts 100th birthday, and to celebrate (aside from eating a questionable amount of Thin Mints) I’d like to talk about girls in the media —teenagers, specifically— because they are our future leaders- a promising generation that could achieve gender parity for good. But…
Source: thewhitehouseproject
Visible Children: We got trouble.
For those asking what you can do to help, please link to visiblechildren.tumblr.com wherever you see KONY 2012 posts.
UPDATE: Facebook has blocked this blog. Complain here and post on Facebook about visiblechildren.tumblr[dot]com instead. And tweet a link to this page to famous people on…
Source: visiblechildren
Tumblr Staff: A New Policy Against Self-Harm Blogs
One of the great things about Tumblr is that people use it for just about every conceivable kind of expression. People being people, though, that means that Tumblr sometimes gets used for things that are just wrong. We are deeply committed to supporting and defending our users’ freedom of speech,…
This is an inspiration. How content moderation should be done. Reddit, are you paying attention?
Source: staff
The Sponsored Status: How NOT to Monetize Facebook
My local newspaper, the Denver Post, has apparently hit on a new way to make Facebook pay: Post “sponsored” status updates, directing fans not to Post content but to an advertiser’s link. Brilliant, right? They have to spend money on a social media manager anyway—why not add some advertising to the feed? Make those 134,000 lazy “likers” earn their daily stream of news posts by helping to close a few ad sales deals!

This LOLcat adequately conveys about a tenth of how NOPE this is:

Terrible monetization strategy, how do I object to thee? Let me count the ways.
- You’re abusing your audience’s permission to send content directly to their News Feed. Yes, Sponsored Tweets exist, but brands do not typically use them to exploit fans of their brand.
- The sponsor is incredibly controversial. A news site forcing fans to look at a TSA jobs ad is like a Catholic site forcing fans to look at a Yazmin ad. Sure, not everyone who reads news dislikes the TSA, but those who do object to it, object intensely.
- Ads in a newspaper don’t have a comments section. Using your Facebook page to post ads? Great way to scare off your advertiser by attracting a bunch of nasty comments! (See above.)
- Your posts—of your own content, the content your fans liked your page to receive—are already sponsored. Intensely. Look what the Post looks like without ads: Negative space!
- You’re not offering any value in exchange for using your fans as a sales pitch to your advertisers. It’d be acceptable if a Post advertiser wanted to sponsor, say, a contest (as I believe has happened before) and provide a prize. But just putting an unwanted ad in fans’ feeds? No-no.
Look, I feel the newspapers’ pain right now. It’s a tough business to be in. A few sponsored statuses won’t make or break the Post’s business, but they will influence a certain number of fans to click “unlike.” I’ll start!
There are plenty of Facebook pages that will feed me a steady stream of local news, without ads that I can’t even get rid of by installing Adblock. To paraphrase the President, “I’m not anti-ad. I’m anti dumb ad.” And Post? That was one dumb ad.
Three Things My Mother Didn’t Tell Me About Being a Girl
I’m a recovering tomboy. Not that there’s anything wrong with being a tomboy! I still maintain that barn dirt is a cosmetic and horse sweat is a perfume, but I used to be the kind of tomboy who rejected “girly” because it was girly, not because of a genuine personal preference. Over the last few years, I woke the heck up and drew the long-overdue conclusion that I don’t need to choose between being a tomboy and being a lady. Problem is, in my family we’re all on the “tomboy spectrum,” so, in terms of my lady-knowledge, I’m about on par with the average Twilight-viewing preteen.
Fortunately, several women in my life have patted me on the head, taken me under their wings, and gently explained a few things. They even do an excellent job of not rolling their eyes at what I don’t know. In case you’re also a tomboy who occasionally likes to act or look like a lady, here are a few open secrets I’ve learned:
1. Tinted Moisturizer. Use that.
.
It’s like wearing makeup without having to know how to wear makeup. And there’s sunscreen in it. Mother of God, this stuff was made for those of us who don’t know the difference between a foundation and a powder and a bronzer, and what in the world is contouring and highlighting anyway? The one above is even at the grocery store, but I’ve heard positive things about “Urban Defense,” too.
2. You Don’t Need Shampoo or Conditioner.

Baking soda, water, apple cider vinegar, and tea tree oil. That’s seriously all you need to replace all that Bumble and Bumble or whatever in your shower. Or you could keep the fancy shampoo and use it once a week or so, but you don’t have to. Check this Livejournal community for instructions. My best friend taught me her method — keep premixed baking soda/water in a squirty water bottle and diluted vinegar with tea tree oil in another in the shower. Baking soda is shampoo and vinegar is conditioner. It’s that easy. Congratulations, now your $80 haircut no longer comes with a $30 shampoo purchase every time.
3. Fleece-Lined Tights Are Real.
No pic for this one because you don’t really need to see my tights to know that fleece-lined tights sound like the most cozy, amazing thing ever. They are. They’re like sweatpants you can wear to work (most places, anyway). This is the first winter I’ve worn skirts and dresses at least once a week, and the entire reason for that is because I’ve discovered that fleece-lined tights exist and are suitable for Colorado winters, and way more comfy than pants. $7, TJ Maxx. Or $10 at Payless Shoes. (Really.) Don’t use greasy lotion right before putting them on if you don’t like lint stuck to your legs.
There you have it… three of the secrets the women of the world may be (unintentionally) keeping from you, my fellow newly-girly gals. Or guys. Nothing wrong with a boy in tinted moisturizer and tights with naturally clean hair, I say.


