Renaissance Girl

Podcasts

2007-09-29T11:13:00.000-07:00

Late to the party, I am only just getting into podcasts...

But now I'm hooked - NPR, BBC, CBC, and of course independant podcasters make up 90% of my media consumption now. My TV is becoming dusty and unused- the DVD and cd players cough up dustbunnies when opened, but the computer is happy- warm and humming away...

I like the idea that anyone can be a broadcaster from the comfort of their own living room. I especially like the fact the NPR broadcasts in Second Life - a stroke of brilliance that blurs the boundaries between virtual and "real life" experience. I wonder if this is beyond what early Internet theorists like Sherry Turkle dreamed: a public media broadcasting on and offline with listeners choosing their preferred way of engagement. Responding to a phone-in radio show can be made in one of three ways, the traditional phone, the ubiquitous email, or now, via the Second Life home of NPR - and while you're at it, pick up an NPR T-shirt for your avatar!

Land based radio may be on the outs, internet radio royalties are unfortunately sky high- a move that favors the large media conglomerates that own most of the land based stations, and a move that threatens public and democratic media. But I for one, hope that podcasts in "real life" and in platforms like Second life remain (and they can, with a little help from the creative commons). It is technologies like these that fuel the workings of the elusive global citizen, and will shift the balance of power in the culture industry.

Customer Service

2007-09-25T07:21:00.000-07:00

After waiting patiently in a big box store for at least 30 minutes without seeing hide nor hair of a service person... After being told repeatedly by people that obviously worked in the store "sorry, but this isn't my department, someone will be along to help you"... After finally being helped by a bored and seemingly humourless customer service rep, who seemed to do the absolute minimum required to help, I am left wondering, oh customer service, where have you gone?

I can see it dwindling in the place I work too, where coworkers go out of their way to say "I'm not on client service today, I can't help people" "It's not my day" or "it's not my job". I see the frustrated look on the client's face - they only came here to ask for what we said we would provide. They're not asking us to go out of our way to help them - and in fact, we're getting paid TO help them, so why do we act like it's such an inconvenience???

I'm not sure if this is a symptom of an individualistic world, where we can tune others out using our technologies, or whether this is a symptom of the commodification of everything, or whether it's merely apathy, but I do think that if we fail to service our customers, we will lose them. They will find what they want elsewhere for a better price (probably the Internet, because if they're not getting service ANYWAY, they might as well shop where there isn't any) and we stand to lose our reason d'etre. And so customer service apathy is a dangerous trap to fall into.

It sounds cheesy, but if we simply CARE for other people in small ways on a day to day basis, then customer service isn't even an issue. I challenge everyone to care a little more today - at work or elsewhere, and see what comes of it.

What we become

2007-09-19T18:48:00.000-07:00

From http://www.quotationspage.com/qotd.html:

"What we become depends on what we read after all of the professors have finished with us. The greatest university of all is a collection of books".
-Thomas Carlyle (1795 - 1881)

Yes, Thomas Carlyle, that's certainly true, but more than what we read, what we become depends on what we do after all our teachers have finished with us. You can read the best, most informative, most important books in the world, just as you can have the best, most informative, most important teacher in your field, and you may still become nothing of consequence. Similarly, you may have the worst mentor in the world, and you can move beyond it (though it is often incredibly difficult). While Carlyle's self study may be an important first step in many fields, reading is not doing, and what we become has more to do with what we do with our book collection after we've read it.

Another quarrel - most books do not teach critical thinking skills. So a collection of books in lieu of a university, while seeming like a good idea on the surface, would be an education built on pretty shabby foundations if the books in the collection are say, trashy romance novels. Sometimes we need guidance to know which books to include in the collection, or how to read with a critical eye.

Still, however, a good mentor does not have to come from a University - If we're lucky perhaps, what we'll become is decent mentors for others, then our quotes can show up on someone else's website one day.

Never Give Up

2007-09-17T12:01:00.000-07:00

From http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/efficacynotgiveup.html:

After Fred Astaire's first screen test, the memo from the testing director of MGM, dated 1933, read, "Can't act. Can't sing. Slightly bald. Can dance a little." He kept that memo over the fire place in his Beverly Hills home. Astaire once observed that "when you're experimenting, you have to try so many things before you choose what you want, that you may go days getting nothing but exhaustion." And here is the reward for perseverance: "The higher up you go, the more mistakes you are allowed. Right at the top, if you make enough of them, it's considered to be your style."

Some days it feels as though nothing is easy. It feels as though you have to fight with a million more talented, richer, more attractive, more graceful people for a little bit of recognition. Some days it feels like nothing matters. Even if you can eke out a little slice of the proverbial pie, it couldn't possible EVER be worth the amount of work you put into it. Nobody cares, nobody notices the work you do, so you might as well do the bare minimum, right?

I think some people actually live by that philosophy, but not the really memorable people. Great thinkers, great athletes, memorable performers, and other mentionables perhaps aren't really that different than 85-90% of the population except for in one thing. They never gave up, even when they were told repeatedly to.

Sometimes it takes a million tries to get something right. Sometimes you have to write a million posts before someone reads your blog.

I can't dance, and I'll probably never be Fred Astaire, but I can learn efficacy, and I can remind myself to keep going, even when my confidence is at its lowest. Because it's never worth doing only the bare minimum, even in a world where nobody else will notice the difference.

Being Busy vs. Leisure Time

2007-09-15T16:16:00.000-07:00

I've noticed that by and large, my friends fall under one of two categories: There are those who are always busy, seem to be taking on all kinds of new projects all the time, and doing each project to the best of their abilities, and there are those who spend every night and weekend hanging out, having leisure time, and wonder why the other ones are never around.

I don't feel like I'm in any position to pass judgment on either choice. The first category is an interesting, yet very stressful way to live. It can also be lonely. If you opt for new experiences over spending time with those who love you, you may find yourself without people to spend time with. On the other hand, the second choice, while more relaxing, seems to offer less in the way of living. Life is so short, that if you spend too much time just hanging out, you may miss the opportunity to try one of the "one day I want to..."s on your life list.

Personally, I fall into the first category. I like to be busy and usually am. In my case this results in the occasional feeling of exhaustion, burnout, periodic loneliness, and anger when I take on more than I should and lash out at those around me. I feel I gain from my choice, a richer life, more interesting experiences, a chance to continually grow, and opportunities to discover myself. Some would argue with me on this last point though, saying that I will only be able to fully know myself when I stop being busy, and start staying still. Maybe they're right, but if staying still doesn't feel like "me", am I not neglecting my own needs by doing it?

Who am I writing for?

2007-09-13T14:20:00.000-07:00

Many new bloggers, graduate students, unpublished authors, and seasoned professional writers alike sometimes wonder "who am I writing for"? Myself, being in the first two categories, and formerly the third, often wonder who I am writing for with a sort of desperation. Nobody's is reading what I write, so my writing is a pointless act of self-delusion. Other times, even if there is a suspected audience, we think that if we can only figure out who that audience is and what they want, then we can write the perfect piece and finally be the accomplished writers we know we can be. One of my undergraduate writing professors always belabored the point "know your audience". She had the entire class convinced that knowing the audience was the secret to professional writing.

While my professor was not wrong in her advice, and while knowing your audience can be helpful especially in business writing, William Zinsser in his book On Writing Well suggests a different approach:

"You are writing for yourself. Don't try to visualize the great mass audience. There is no such audience - every reader is a different person. Don't try to guess what sort of thing editors want to publish, or what you think the country is in a mood to read. Editors and readers don't know what they want to read until they read it" (p.25)

If you are writing for yourself, it's easy to know your audience. If you're writing for yourself, it's easier to stay motivated to practice your craft and write every day. Even if your feedburner says, as mine always does: 0 readers.

Without Google, I May Cease to Exist...

2007-09-11T21:20:00.000-07:00

Google runs my life now... If I think about it, there are several very good reasons why without Google I would cease to exist. I will explain them here:

1) I Blog, therefore I am. Google owns Blogger. And since I write my thoughts here in order to achieve personal verification, and self actualization, without Blogger I may be swallowed by the whole of my own significance. I would certainly disappear from Netspace.

2)My Calendar is completely managed by Google Calendar. Again, without the reassurance of daily life events (work, leisure, personal development, etc) I cannot be sure that I would be doing anything at all. Google Calendar validates my existence by providing me with places I need to be, and in so doing reinforces the fact that I do, actually exist.

3)Google Desktop provides me with a link to the outside world. This proves to me that the world exists, and I by proxy, exist in it. With the drag of my mouse I find out what the weather is doing, what the headlines are, and whether my favorite blog has been updated. Since these feeds are always changing, I am fairly confident that the world and I still exist.

4)I am searchable. It's not easy, my blog is nowhere near the top of the ranks or anything, but technically, I am searchable. This beyond everything else proves I must exist, though without it I cannot be so sure of my own existence.

Think about it...Would you exist without Google? Myspace? Facebook? Without them, how do you know you're not just a figment of your own (or someone else's) imagination?

Does the Internet Facilitate Democracy?

2007-09-10T09:37:00.000-07:00

Well... In my humble opinion yes, and no.

All the buzz in the blogosphere of late about unfair funding practices for elections shows that technology helps people do 2 things: 1. access previously unaccessible information and 2. talk about it with each other. Since access to information and dialog are essential for a working democracy, technology does make a difference, does help citizens create a more democratic society.

but on the other hand, who owns the technological infrastructure anyway? Large corporate interests. And technology is only as good as the coding behind it. In the book CODE, Lawrence Lessig reminds us that if corporate and government interests want to code Internet software for commercial gain, then they will. And coding for commercial gain is often at odds with coding for the citizenry to engage in democratic dialog. Besides, judging by the results of the last US election, fear is a much more powerful motivator than rational dialog and access to information when it comes to making an important decision like who to nominate King for four years.

So technology has the potential to aid democracy, but only people can live up to the potential. Back to square one?

The Relationship End User Agreement

2007-09-07T20:17:00.000-07:00

I think relationships should have end user agreements. What would yours look like if you valued yourself enough to have one? What would your potential mate have to do, or accept before he or she would be allowed to download your application? How would your dating life change if, even secretly and in principle only, you had a list of conditions that had to be met before you would let a person move past the thirty day trial period?

I think mine would go something like this:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NOTICE TO BOYFRIEND/GIRLFRIEND: PLEASE READ THIS CONTRACT CAREFULLY, BY DATING, COMMITTING TO, AND HAVING SEX WITH ALL OR ANY PORTION OF THIS WOMAN, YOU ACCEPT ALL TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, INCLUDING, IN PARTICULAR THE LIMITATIONS ON DATING AND HAVING SEX WITH OTHER PEOPLE CONTAINED IN SECTION 2. YOU AGREE THAT THIS AGREEMENT IS ENFORCEABLE LIKE ANY WRITTEN NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT SIGNED BY YOU. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT DATE THIS WOMAN.

1.Definitions: "Woman" means the girl whose pants you're looking to get into, silly.

2.Licenses: If you obtained the woman with her explicit consent, and subject to your compliance with the terms of this agreement (this "Agreement"), including the restrictions in Section 2.2, You are granted an exclusive license to Date this woman in the manner described in the documentation as follows.

2.1 General Use: You may take this woman out for dinner, movies, or coffee or be taken out for same by this woman. You may also engage in certain acts of physical intimacy, cuddling, and emotional support.

2.2 Limitations: You may NOT date any other woman concurrently, or otherwise abuse the trust placed upon you while in this relationship. You may NOT physically, psychologically or emotionally harm the woman. You may NOT engage in passive aggressive guilt trips nor side against this woman in an argument with your mother. Failure to comply with these limitations will result in immediate revoking of the dating contract and possible legal action or psychological trauma

If you have any questions regarding this Agreement or if you wish to request any information from the woman please use the address and contact information included with this product or via the web at www.getaclue.com to contact the dating office serving your jurisdiction

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Of course it's a joke, and everything is exaggerated for comedic effect, but it's worth thinking about. What are you not willing to compromise on in your relationships with others. And if you find something that you are currently compromising on when you really shouldn't be, what can you do to change it?

The Blank Page

2007-09-07T07:25:00.000-07:00

Nothing is quite so intimidating as the blank page (or in this case, the blank screen).
As I stare at my blog, or my paper, willing the words to appear. I type one line, then erase it and start again. Type two lines, erase at least one. Any writer knows the pain of birthing a written work, like when it takes you three hours to write on paragraph that you later edit out because it didn't fit anyway.

But somehow, miraculously, I always end up with something as long as I keep on writing. It may not be the best most genius written work that I or the world has ever seen, but it's far better than the blank page.

And as long as I keep writing, I know that slowly I'm getting better at it. Perfection is the enemy of done. If I try to do everything (including writing) perfectly then I will be paralyzed into never doing anything. So just keep going, despite the awkward sentences, the dearth of ideas, or the three hour paragraph. And maybe by doing so I can finally make peace with the blank page and the promises it offers.

The Searchable Face(book)

2007-09-05T20:49:00.001-07:00

So Facebook has opened its doors to Google. Fairly soon people will be able to search for other people on Facebook without being a member of the social networking site. The walled garden has a door - or at least a window.

I wonder, will this make Facebook more like Myspace? A site where people go to connect with people they don't yet know (or might never know) in "real life"? So far, Facebook seems to meet Zuckerberg's original goal: connect people who already know each other in real life, and strengthen offline social connection. Something like telephone 2.0. Myspace, on the other hand, was originally designed as a way for musicians to network with each other, and market themselves on the web. A way for people to meet people that they didn't or perhaps could never meet in person.

Now that Facebook has teamed up with Google, it is worth considering whether this will change the ways people use this social networking software. Will an expanded search result in a greater use of Facebook for business networking? Will there be more spam? Will this expand people's Facebook network? Probably all these things are true. I'll see you there.

The Surrealism of Everyday life

2007-09-04T15:45:00.000-07:00

Found out from BoingBoing today (my favorite alternative news source) a woman at an art gallery came face to muscle (?) with her own heart. She'd had a heart transplant and donated her former, now it's part of an educational art exhibit.

This leaves me pondering the surrealism of everyday life.

This link to mortality, this representation of life and love and humanity, sitting in a box as part of an art exhibit. What makes biology art. Is it enough that an art piece make people think, or must it be more to be classified as art? If it must be more then what makes a useless (diseased) muscle art? If all that is required of art is that it make people think, what is the difference between art and education?

Is a heart in a box a biology class, or an art exhibit?

Holy Patriarchy Batman!

2007-09-03T16:57:00.000-07:00

Ok... you just have to laugh. I came across this link via BoingBoing and it was an interesting exploration of the Male Gaze.

The women who are subjects of the photography are treated almost as children. The weaker, even lesser sex who must be spoiled, handled with kid gloves, and definitely not taken seriously. This is not a photographers how-to guide but a magazine by men, for men, about such topics as how to take pictures of a woman in a phone book without her noticing; how to pick up beautiful female hitch-hikers, and my favorite, how to deal with a "honey bear" without getting your cigarettes (or pants) stolen.

The photos themselves are great, and in their own way revealing as well.

As a smart woman, who also poses for the occasional pinup pic, I for one am glad to not be pigeon-holed into the soft porn "glamour" persona of yesteryear. As much as I understand that we still have a long way to go in fighting for women's rights, sometimes it's also good to remember how far we've come.

Welcome Politicians to the 21st Century

2007-09-03T07:37:00.000-07:00

According to the BBC, Australian Prime Minister John Howard has posted a video on YouTube asking people not to join in violent protests during the Apec summit in Sydney.

The BBC article describes Prime Minister Howard as a politician from the black and white television age. Well it seems he just entered the 21st Century with a bang.

What do I think? Well aside from the whether or not people should be able to freely protest the Apec summit, I think this is an interesting case study of social networks and the Internet.

John Howard is either a very smart leader, or (possibly more likely) he has hired the right advisors. He knows that many of the protesters will be organizing and promoting their causes using the Internet as a tool, so he is using the same tool to try to appeal to them. Whether or not his appeal is successful, I think he is right to use the Internet, maybe this means he is trying to understand the people he helps govern.

The Six Million Dollar Blog

2007-09-02T08:20:00.000-07:00

It seems we've lost all our readers, and I understand why. Heck, I've even lost Nigel (haha) and since we've been so negligent at updating I get the moving on thing.

So now here comes the long uphill battle of building a blog again.

Reminder: post every day, write about what you are passionate about, keep posting, build links...

keep posting, write what you are passionate about, build links...

If you build it they will come?

Seth Godin reminds us to keep things short and thought provoking. Too long and you'll just lose people.

What am I passionate about? Arts, Performance, Activism and Communication.
So for my part, I'll try to focus on those, and tag posts accordingly. Why rebuild it unless you can rebuild it (we have the technology: faster, better, the six million dollar blog)

Back at it, then

2007-09-01T16:15:00.000-07:00

hmmmm.....

Break for school
Graduate with a BA
Get accepted to MA program with scholarship
Marriage breaks up
Meet someone else
Contemplate doing PhD
Write thesis on Social Networks (including blogging)

I guess that means it's time to revive the old blog.

I used to think that nobody was interested in reading what I had to say. Now I believe that a great many people are not only interested in what I have to say, but they could potentially benefit from what I have to share with the world.

Nigel, if you are still out there, here is a message into the ether for you...
Let's keep going - start afresh, something new and better than before

The loft awaits

Holy Hell

2006-11-12T20:46:00.000-08:00

I just checked out our page because I linked to a friend's blog - hello Andrina - and realised that while it has been nearly five months since I last wrote here, I am poised to do the very same thing tonight...and I'm happy about that. Life in Vancouver has been very good (not perfect, thankfully, or I'd start to wonder when the other shoe was going to drop and get nothing done because of the overanalysis).

Work is still a means to an end but I feel...clear. And clarity of thought helps me to feel like I'm working towards something and that is starting to feel an awful lot like, yes, fulfillment. But I'm whispering that for right now because this is a life long project and one I hope to always roll up both sleeves for - always. Especially with the help of good friends.

Running Out For Dinner On Main Street

2006-07-14T20:54:00.000-07:00

Another month has been and gone and I am feeling more entrenched here in the Big Smoke. Work perplexes me and I wonder if I will ever be able to undertake any form of work borne of colonialism without cringing. I think "poverty pimps" is the term the kids are using these days...a fellow consultant calls us "shadow servants." All very CIA which is quite topical considering the news these days...

So, I will continue on and keep you posted (no pun intended) while enjoying and pondering my illustrious co-blogger's original poetry and quoted poetry - it seems we are both turning a corner and exploring wider horizons...as are we all.

Keeping the home fires burning

2006-06-25T16:51:00.000-07:00

For months now I have been feeling a little guilty about letting this blog die such a sad little death. The response to my last post was so overwhelming I was frankly stunned into silence. However, I cannot let my lack of writing here be so easily, and irresponsibly, excused by friends' and starngers' supportive comments to my struggle to find purpose and THE PATH.

So, let me start by saying thank you...and I'm sorry that I did not take advantage of so many of your offers of help. I did hear what each and every one of you contributed by way of your comments to my last post and I like to think knowing all of you were out there (and so positive in your beliefs that I would find my way) helped me...well, find my way.

Two months ago I relocated to Vancouver, British Columbia for a new job that I will call my "recovery job," to paraphrase a friend. While this is not the career-for-the-rest-of-my-life job I do feel this work holds some promising future opportunities. And it is good to be bringing home the bacon...

A new city gives fresh perspective and while I would like to see myself as a flexible person who embraces change - I'm not. So, while all of this change has been a struggle it has been good to blow out some of the cobwebs I have let stand for far too long. I still feel like a fuck-up every once in awhile but I temper those times by doing "best-of-tours" (paraphrasing that same friend) and go to places in this city that make me smile.

I am meeting new people, attending events (World Urban Forum 3 - before hair pulling became a part of the security process), and generally pushing myself to be awake more often and take advantage of the fact that life really does have so much to offer. Not to freak out those of you who know me best - I still have moments where I wonder if this was the best choice, did I take this job/make this move because I was tired of being 'out there' exploring and just wanted to root myself.

I still think about researching in foreign countries - I feel confident that my skills are transferable to indigenous peoples and advocacy issues globally (that is what I do if this is the first I have mentioned that in this space).

BUT...being rooted doesn't scare me like it once did. Committing myself to somewhere and something sounds interesting and, more importantly, possible.

So, I will attempt to keep this space viable and current and maybe even lure my partner in crime - Jay - back on board.

And, again, thank you thank you thank you for all of your good thoughts and warm wishes - they were felt.

Sincerely,
Nigel

Hello, again...

2005-11-09T23:51:00.000-08:00

As I feel quite confident that no one is reading us anymore (not even "us" most of the time) I will keep this brief. I recently quit my job. I am now frantically searching not only for a new one but some idea of what I want the new one to be...I have turned away from the web probably at a time when it would be most helpful and I have turned so far inward that I have come out the other side - ever watch a little brother pour salt on a slug?

Moving on...

I just wanted to say, again, we are still here, still trying to keep our little blog afloat. Just a heads up that our contributions to the world wide web will be sporadic at best. Note: we will try for a couple of times a month.

So, I look forward to reconnecting with the web and the bloggers I have grow so fond of reading and I want to thank our loyal readership when we had you, if we still do, and those of you that -miracle of miracles - may even now be new to us.

Sincerely, Nigel

Because his Ideas are Good

2005-09-12T21:16:00.000-07:00

A new e-book from Seth Godin at: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2005/09/whos_there_the_.html

The ideas are good for anyone interested in having their blog read (translation: all of us) but it is worth noting that none of his ideas are anything new under the sun. As early as 1996, a communications researcher (Nancy Baym, see http://www.people.ku.edu/~nbaym/) did studies of online communities in soap opera fan newsgroups (sounds cheesy, but read on). It seems those newsgroups had prolific and popular "posters" whose ideas would spread amoung the entire readership. These posters got popular by posting messages that were fun, relevant, and informative. Once they became known as authorities in their online communities, they could post almost anything, and would still maintain a large readership (relating to the: it matters what you post, no, it matters who you are, first two sections in Seth's e-book.

It just goes to show. In human communication nothing is really new - only the character of the challenge has changed (read below for further thoughts on the timelessness of human communication and technology.

But Seth's e-book is actually really good. Old news told in a new way. Recommended reading for every blogger.

How to get your message out to those who wish to read it

2005-09-09T14:22:00.000-07:00

Or how to use other people to get what you want.

As a blogger and/or a business communicator, this is an important aspect of self promotion.

Reflect on Networking, for a moment. Remember the last time you were at a conference, or a cocktail party. You would seek out the people in the room who you felt were the most important or had the greatest ability to help you achieve their goals. Then what do you do? You grab your coffee, or your glass of wine, and position yourself as close to that person as possible. Once there, you try to say something witty, or something interesting to get that person interested in talking to you. When they turn to face you, engage in eye contact and you both have a conversation you know that you are networking really well. Then after a while, you move away and seek out others to network with. Most of us do this instinctively, it's part of getting ahead in self promotion.

What we don't usually do is dissect, on a very basic level, what is taking place here. In real life networking, we use proxemics to filter the people we want to talk to from the rest. Everybody does this, in fact, proxemics is one of our most basic human perceptions. Using proxemity to filter our communications is what's known as social filter. Experienced networkers are very skilled with how they use proxemics to make an impact. Even something as simple as standing a little too close to somebody can be a winning move at the hand of a good networker, and a disasterous move when done by somebody who does not know what they are doing.

But like I said, most of us already do this - what complicates things is technology. When you interact with a computer screen or write your blog, you can't exactly use physical proxemics BUT you can still use social filtering. On the internet though, social filtering becomes more of a "word of mouth" type of thing. Generally experienced internet users LEVERAGE THE KNOWLEDGE of others to find information that is useful to them on the web (after all, we KNOW there is too much information out there - it is very difficult to find exactly what you're looking for). How do they use other people to find what they need? Through membership in online communities, social bookmarking sites (del.icio.us, furl - if you haven't signed up already go, go now), and by looking at the ratings of others before they decide where to go, or what to buy (AMAZON.com is great for this i.e. "see what others who bought this book also bought).

Google is a dinosaur, it's over. The way you promote yourself, is by joining a community (or many) of like minded people, and sharing with them your favorite sites on the web. When your community starts to realize that you have similar tastes, and a good knowledge of what is available on the net - they will not hesitate to come to your own site, and recommend it to others. Then since they are also members of many online communities, other people will be looking to them for suggestions as well - and your site will spread.

It is almost no longer enough to just update your blog. You have to get out there, and network in the internet cocktail party. This means commenting on other peoples work, joining a social bookmarking site, and seeking out like minded people on the world wide web.

An Interesting Study of Why Effective Advertising Really Works

2005-09-08T13:52:00.000-07:00

About Mcdonald's, and the documentary "Super Size Me"

again, I wrote this for school, but I figure since I'm doing alot of writing for school right now, I might as well share it to keep the blog fed :)

In 2003, Morgan Spurlock took the world by surprise with his Academy Award nominated documentary Super Size Me. In his documentary, his health took a drastic dive when vegan Spurlock chose to eat nothing but food from McDonalds for 30 days. This documentary was very popular, and Spurlock became an anti fast food celebrity. A strange thing happened about a year after the documentary ratcheted Morgan Spurlock to fame: Mcdonald’s restaurants took the super-sizing option off their menu, and started promoting a “healthier choices” menu. Advertisements for the restaurant chain began to feature a new, physically active Ronald Mcdonald. Mcdonalds restaurants told the public that this change had nothing to do with Super Size Me, but a savvy public suspected otherwise. I intend to use Roland Barthes Semiotic theory to illustrate why this popular documentary had the ability to change a mammoth corporation.

Barthes would probably label fast food advertising as its own semiotic system. He maintained that the most important semiotic systems in our culture serve to maintain the status quo. This is because the mythology that surrounds these systems tells people that things are the way they ought to be, always have been, and always will be. This was good for Mcdonalds, whose mandate is to get as many people as possible to eat at their restaurants. As far as the fast food chain was concerned, they did not have to change anything about the way they conducted business as long as their symbols were working as part of a well functioning advertising campaign. After all, if customers are still walking in the door, why change? For Mcdonalds restaurants limited, the most recognized symbol in their arsenal was of course, the Golden Arches themselves. In Mcdonalds’ very effective advertising campaign, this sign was associated with family, fun, low prices, convenience food and “You deserve a break today.” Mcdonalds had already very expertly turned the symbol of a clown into a mythic or connative symbol for fast food rather than its original meaning as a symbol for childhood innocence and fun. According to Barthes, this transformation in meaning follows a typical semiotic pattern. Every connotative sign is really the result of two sign systems that are interconnected. The first system is very simple, the signifier (in this case a clown) and the signified (childhood fun at the circus) combined to make the sign (clown = fun). The sign from this first system then goes on to become the signifier in the second system, and thus creates an ideologial sign. In Mcdonalds case, the signifier (clown = fun) combines with the signified (fast food restaurant geared towards families) to create a very successful advertising campaign (eating at Mcdonalds is fun, and will make your family happy). Barthes tells us that the original sign does not lose its message in this transformation, but since the signifier can’t tell you about the sign’s historical or cultural past, the mythical or connotative sign remains hollow and false.

One of the main problems with hollow, mythic signs, according to Barthes is that only those with knowledge of semiotics can spot the “crust of falsity” that these signs carry. Spurlock may have understood how effectively Mcdonalds was using the symbols of Ronald Mcdonald and the Golden Arches to target people from all walks of life, but most peole eating at the restaurant did not stop to think why it was that Mcdonalds’ advertising campaign had succeeded in getting them in the door that day. While most people saw Mcdonalds as a cheap burger and a good milkshake, Barthes would have seen it as a place involved in “dangerous mythmaking” and we can imagine that Morgan Spurlock experienced similar feelings, leading to his decision to make the movie. Barthes and Spurlock would tell us that when Mcdonalds uses a mythical symbol to indicate to us that “fast food is fun” we feel somehow like we can buy our way out of feelings that are less than fun. Many of the people that eat at Mcdonalds are lower income parents and their families. Being a parent is not always fun, especially when you have to work all day to support your kids, you shuttle them around to their after school activities, and you’re left without the time or energy to cook dinner in the evening. So you take them to the place which promises that fun is just a Happy Meal away, because the sign tells us that “being in a family should be easy and fun.” In this manner, the happy family and their easy life is co-opted by Mcdonalds. It takes a pretty powerful use of semiological warfare to help us see through that fog.

Perhaps without intending a semiological protest, Morgan Spurlock’s movie created a competing sign. With the process described above, he successfully turned Mcdonalds’ “golden arches” into a signifier for a sign that now represented heart disease, obesity, and early death. This second order, connotative sign produced by Spurlock was enough to cause many people to boycott Mcdonalds, and Mcdonalds to change it’s entire menu. Essentially, Spurlock took the ideological baggage, or connotation of the Mcdonalds symbol, and replaced it with a new connotation in the minds of those who watched his documentary. The resulting signified (the concept of Mcdonalds’ food being unhealthy) had more of an affinity to its signifier (fast food), than Mcdonalds’ original connotation did. Barthes interpretation of signs always upholding the values of the dominant class is happily debatable in this case. Spurlock effectively created a positive connotative sign. This sign encouraged people to think twice about what Mcdonalds was really offering them, and caused the burger giant to start a re-branding campaign in defense. However, if the rebranding campaign is successful, then maybe the truth is closer to what Barthes and sociologist Dick Hebdige propose: a brief period ofsubversive semiotic power, which is later co-opted by mainstream society. I prefer the former, because it is hopeful to think that somebody working inside a dominant medium (in this case filmmaking, which is too often used to enforce the values corporations) can change the world for the better. I’m sure Morgan Spurlock would believe in one man’s power to create positive change, but Barthes would probably tell us that we are being too idealistic. Only time will give us the answer.

Organizational Communication (originally written for school)

2005-09-06T09:14:00.000-07:00

I recently worked for an organization that was falling behind in their customer satisfaction ratings. Clients told us that they felt that our competition was listening to them more effectively than we were. Management grew very concerned, when customers were started taking their money elsewhere. We worked in a very competitive business, and in order to keep the shareholders happy, we’d have to keep our stock value up. This was something we could not achieve if our customers did not believe in us. Management tried to address this problem by developing mandatory staff training programs with messages of "putting customers first" and "enhancing the client experience." They enforced a stricter dress code, and they insisted that all employees limit personal effects to only five items per office. They said that if we followed these guidelines we would appear more professional and thus improve our customer service reviews. Staff however, didn’t understand why these measures were necessary. We felt that we were already offering superior customer service, and we wondered whether the clean office guideline was really a good solution to the problem. We knew that customers were not leaving because they got poor service from the employees. Nor were they leaving because we had messy offices. They were leaving because they felt that the organization did not listen to them. During this same time period, management decided to lay off hundreds of employees and move an entire processing center from Vancouver to Toronto. This move slowed transaction time considerably which annoyed our clients further. These cost-cutting measures kept the organization on top, but did not offer a long-term solution.

Communication theorist Stanley Deetz would tell us that this company’s failure to listen to both their customers and their employees indicates a larger systemic problem. Corporations are a dominant force in our society, but decisions in how corporations are run are made only by a privileged few. Deetz says that our quality of life is compromised when corporations "control and colonize" our lives. Corporations achieve control because they control language, and language has a profound influence on the way we think. Any information we receive from corporate communications is suspect because corporate information is created by undemocratic processes which are put in place to protect managerialism. Managerialism, according to Deetz, is logic, practices and ideology that value control. This desire for control can overcome even a desire for money, performance, or in my company’s case, customer satisfaction. My company put money into a training program in what they said was an attempt to solve the problem, but Deetz would tell us that this was only the company trying to avoid a public conflict. Conflict avoidance is present in any company desiring managerial control. In my company’s example, if any of the dissatisfied customers asked what the company was doing to fix the situation, the company could show the clean offices and the training budget in order to diffuse potential conflict. The training programs were also a good way for the company to shift responsibility for the service problem to the employees, as part of their conflict avoidance strategy. Staff, for our part, was unknowingly helping the company scapegoat us. Through a process Deetz calls consent, we were working in the best interests of the company in a faulty attempt to fulfill our own interests. In other words, when we cleaned out our offices we were allowing the corporation to retain control over our working lives. Deetz tells us that managerial control of workplace language is to blame for this seemingly nonsensical employee compliance. When management told us that empty offices were more "professional" and "enhanced the client experience," we believed them, and in turn that language created our workplace reality. The more people take for granted corporate control of their lives, the more consent occurs. In our situation, employees started to feel that the company was regressing. We used to have involvement – a place we could go to post suggestions about how to make things better at the company. A few months ago, management discontinued that program, and didn’t tell us why. Perhaps management wanted us to feel that we weren’t qualified to discuss how to improve the organization. This discursive closure is another example of distorted communication within my company.

Deetz proposes a better solution to our customer service problem than the one my company initiated. He suggests that this problem, along with many others could be solved if the company was accountable not just to shareholders, but to six groups of stakeholders, each with varying interests. These stakeholders would have a say in any decision the company makes, and managers in the company would act as mediators to ensure a balance between everybody’s diverse interests. The investors, workers, customers, suppliers, host community, and world at large should have a say in how my company is run. In the problem described above, we can imagine how the act of just giving employees and customers a voice in corporate decision making would have changed the situation. If we also took into account the needs of the community where the hundreds of employees were laid off, and the investors who value long-term performance and security for their investments, the final decision would be more democratic, and the company would soon be working in everybody’s best interest. I think that if my company had been run this way, it would have received high client satisfaction ratings. The customers and employees would have justifiably felt that their voices were heard. In Deetz’ proposal, accountability is not just lip service, or a good PR word. It becomes a reality

We Are Still Here I Promise

2005-09-01T20:11:00.000-07:00

So between the two of us and our ever busy schedules, it seems Jay and I are doing a pretty good job of keeping this blog on the bottom of our collective priority lists. I believe I can speak for both of us when I say we will reclaim our blog sooner rather than later, once we find ourselves in balance with all of our responsibilities. I suppose I should read more of our Ho'ohana Community cohorts and follow their lead in areas such as time management. I've bored you with this lament of mine before...

I will refrain from linking to the myriad sources detailing the recent disaster in the Southern U.S. but I will say there are a lot of emotions there...anger at government ignorance and blatant neglect...helplessness, sympathy and fear for those in the middle of the tragedy's storm. Ok, I lied, one link - from the Globe.