Really interesting piece of analysis by The Times Lab on the changing landscape of revenue in the music business (in the UK) between artists and the industry.  

A few things jumped out at me:

1.  It's the graph the music industry doesn't want you to see.  It shows how artist revenues have actually increased in the era of file sharing while the revenue going to the industry has decreased.  So, if you're business model is purely one of content distribution it's perhaps time to exit.

2.  The fastest growing area of revenue is that of live shows. As the post points out, "at some point next year revenues from gigs payable to artists will for the first time overtake revenues accrued by labels from sales of recorded music".   Not sure if this is a case of more people going to shows, more shows occurring or more profitable deals for artists, but it does suggest to me that this is perhaps evidence of the fact that we tend to enjoy doing stuff together.  Perhaps music is the ultimate social good, rather than the private good record labels would like it to be.  

3. Arguably, the last century of recorded music has been an anomaly in how we consume music and we're going back to how we have always enjoyed it - live and together.  The content distributed is perhaps really no more than a calling card and artifact of something far bigger and more powerful.

The second installment of Spur from psfk and Redscout is all about talent, or what a bunch of us are looking for in planners today.

That's the question posed in the first installment of Spur, from Redscout and psfk.  Does the way we think about and practice planning make us impotent or are we neutered by the factory like structure of some agencies?

Colin Drummond wrote a great post today about the need to start planning around a better, broader definition of interactivity.  Taps into a lot of the stuff Jason and I rambled on about at Planningness.

As I wrote in the comments, far too frequently we forget that interactive and digital are not channels but a type of communication (arguably, the only type of advertising that is true communication). And far too often we forget that it's not the technology that's interesting and meaningful, but what it's doing to culture and human behavior that's interesting and meaningful (thankfully we have Henry Jenkins and Clay Shirky around to keep reminding us).

Hugh Macleod doodled a great cartoon this week about the real power of the internet.  It's something we mustn't forget.

So word is finally out about John Winsor's next move following CPB.  And I can't help but think it's a brilliant and bold one.  Along with the very talented and funny CPB alum Evan Fry of be fucking awesome fame (and if Dusty is right maybe the writer of the longest piece of ad copy written with the Eating The Angus Diet book) and Claudia Batten he's launched Victors and Spoils.  

It's a brilliant and bold attempt to drag crowdsourcing into the agency business, and put some innovation into the agency business.  I wish them all the best in their new adventure as the first agency built on crowdsourcing principles.  Go visit their site and become part of the creative department.

A few months ago, Alain Sylvain at Redscout asked me to participate in a film they were making about the state of planning - where it is now and where it needs to go.  He got a great bunch of people to participate - including Domenico Vitale, John Gerzema,  Douglas Atkin, Dan Cherry and Paul Woolmington - and the film is going to be serialized over the next couple of months at PSFK.  The trailer is now up and the films will begin to appear every couple of weeks starting next Tuesday at Spur.

One of the many nice things about Planningness (more to come later) was the chance to catch up with some old friends over dinner last night - Gorse, Mark, Ed, Grant, Jason, Dino, Emily, Rob and Adrian among others.  

There was also a little surprise as the infamous 'tankard of Colman' made an appearance in San Francisco (via Jason via Faris).  It's still traveling strong after over 3 years.  

Eva Hasson is now the proud guardian of the tankard.  It's next stop will be Israel...

So, I set a little task for the APSotW and have finally had a chance to review the submissions. Here's the brief again: 

You work for Wal-Mart's agency as a planner.  You client, at the CMOs behest, has asked you to consider whether Wal-Mart should build a standalone social network for the brand to help deepen the role Wal-Mart plays in the lives of the 2 out of 3 Americans who visit them every week.  Your job is to write a point of view and recommendation on what action should be taken.  In one page.  It will be sent direct to the CMO who is traveling China looking at expansion opportunities.

There were three responses, thanks for taking part.  

Let's start (in no particular order) with Zeljko's.  Starts with a business problem to address (people doing online price comparison), and goes on to explain an idea that has some power to it - build a site that aggregates store information (most purchased items), shopper reviews, etc.  Some nice thinking as well about spreading this data through the web via data visualization.

There's some good stuff here but the argument could have been sharper - sharper business problem, how the idea solves that problem.  And could have been clearer signposting of the argument.  There's a great phrase in here about the pulse of the American shopper that could have been the theme of the memo.

Second submission is from Jacob.  The approach is not a million miles away from Zeljko's.  Arguably it's stronger in defining how the platform might work and what benefits it might bring, but is weaker as it doesn't really define the business problem this might address or what it's role might be for the business.

Finally, we have an anonymous entry.  There's some good stuff here about doing lots of small stuff, fitting into a seasonal calendar and into people's lives but it seems to be missing the bigger picture - what's the problem or opportunity, what's the strategic idea to take advantage or solve this, how it works and why it makes sense to invest in.  

That last comment feels true to all the entries.  All would have benefitted from some clearer signposting, some crisper, more memorable language and even some attempt at making a case for why investment makes sense  - how much might it cost and what might the business expect to get back from it and why this makes more sense than other alternative investments.  (I know we haven't got data but we could make some assumptions).  Anyway, thanks all for contributing and hope this feedback was of some use.  I know it was  a dry challenge, but I think it's an important one.

I was meant to be moderating a panel in New York last night on creating digital culture but sadly, due to a new business pitch, I had to drop out.  There was a great set of panelists including Rick Webb, James Cooper and John Winsor, someone I’ve been keen to meet for several years.  I was sad at the time, but I’m now doubly sad after reading the new book he has written with Alex Bogusky called ‘Baked In’.  (Full disclosure - thanks for sending me an advance copy, John).

At it’s heart, it’s a book that nails one of the simple things many organizations, particularly ad agencies, have forgot.  The worlds of product development and marketing should not be separate.  In fact, you create a much more powerful business and brand when you bake marketing directly in to the product.  It’s about blurring the difference between product and marketing, an idea that has created things like Nike+ and Help Remedies and has revitalized brands like Domino’s.   And while a lot of the examples used are about physical products, there’s lots of examples, and applicable thinking, of how the digital space can be used  for more than interruption, destination creation and the application of old ad models, but for the creation of meaningful products and services that foster powerful conversation and communities around them.

It’s a really practical read, packed full of case studies, bite size thoughts and exercises – very much, a book that encourages learning by doing.  And, unlike most of its peers, it talks in plain English and doesn’t overstretch the point.  It’s a thought provoking 150 pages rather than the usual four hundred pages to drag out an idea that might have best been served as a blog post.

Well worth a read.  And it doesn’t stop with the book.  John and Alex have put their beliefs into practice – there’s a twitter feed and blog to stimulate and capture the conversation the book hopefully starts.

The IPA are holding an event next Tuesday to have a conversation around social media (itself, a rather smart reaction to a very unsocial IPA thing last year).  They've just published the principles, including ones written by the always smart Mark Earls, Amelia Torode, Neil Perkin, Faris Yakob and others.  Not necessarily nothing new in the thinking, but they stand, I think, as a smart summary of what social media really is (and that's not a channel).

Stumbled across this today.  A great new project called, excuse my filthy mouth, be fucking awesome.

Mark Lewis has done a brilliant job in setting up the planning-ness conference in San Francisco the weekend of October 16th and 17th.