Like always, I’m joined by fellow Canadian automotive journalists (and friends) Nauman Farooq and Derek Kreindler.

You can listen to it here in your browser, at blubrry.com, and can be viewed/downloaded from iTunes.

Special thanks to Jil McIntosh for putting a podcast banner up on her site. And you can email suggestions or complaints to podcast [at] banovsky.com.

Our awesome intro music was done by the great Toronto band, Old World Vulture, and the track is called, “How the West Was Lost”. Check ‘em out.

Like always, I’m joined by my fellow Canadian automotive journalists and friends Nauman Farooq and Derek Kreindler.

You can listen to it here in your browser, at blubrry.com, and can be viewed/downloaded from iTunes.

Special thanks to Jil McIntosh for putting a podcast banner up on her site. And you can email suggestions or complaints to podcast [at] banovsky.com.

Our awesome intro music was done by the great Toronto band, Old World Vulture, and the track is called, “How the West Was Lost”. Check ‘em out.

“Google’s not in business to give you the truth, it’s in business to give what you think is relevant,” Michael Fertik, ReputationDefender founder, via

This post is due, in part, to the majestic Byron Hurd. Oh, and Jack Baruth, Zerin Dube, Derek Kreindler, and the rest of the S:S:L crew. And Suzanne Denbow. We were sitting at the Detroit Auto Show, specifically at the Mazda display, leeching wireless Internet like a commune of gypsy World of Warcraft gamers.

Hurd’s majesty is because of a comment he made after a particularly painful encounter with a fellow media badge holder. It went something like: “To an auto manufacturer, it doesn’t really matter if they invite him or Dan Neil. They know that Google doesn’t care when someone is searching for an opinion.”

And until reputation-based search becomes reality, he’s right.

I don’t need to remind everyone that the brilliance of the web is that everyone can have a say. Anti-Adidas zealots likely share server space with Neo-Nazis and Martin Luther King, Jr. tribute pages. Given a little luck, some writing skill, and a bit of promotion, and you may end up like dooce, TMZ, or The Huffington Post; examples that “regular” people can earn an audience and reputation to rival large web portals.

But here’s the problem with reputation-based search: how do you decide who has a worthy reputation? A multi-million dollar advertising contract? Millions of blog subscribers? Nearly a year ago, I wrote:

“Every time someone types F-o-r-d onto a web page and someone else types F-o-r-d into a Google search box, there’s a chance the former will influence the latter — whether or not it’s in reference to a review, a deal on an oil change, or whatever.

“And who is to say my review of a car should be read any more than an owner’s review of a car? Or a recall notice? Or the latest financing deal? Believing that the web will point people to your content because you’re a professional is pretty arrogant, and possibly career-curtailing.”

If you’re making something and trying to get the word out, where do you start? Advertising and creating buzz for a product in the Internet age has become a double-edged sword: do you stick with established players, like the New York Times, and its loyal-yet-dwindling audience? Or do you spend less and fly a wide-eyed blogger to an event, hoping to capture a very strong positive opinion for a specific audience?

I say neither. Keep the corporate credit card sheathed.

Start with your current customers, or people who would enjoy your product. You know, early adopters. I see travel, food, product, and automotive reviews starting with a comprehensive customer feedback system in place of expensive junkets.

It’s starting. Toyota, during the Canadian launch of the new 4Runner SUV, invited members of Internet forums for the event. (Toyota was hardly the first, but the practice is becoming widespread. Just ask Ferrari, who first invited only their very best customers to drive the new 599xx supercar. Journalists? What journalists?)

And who better to cater to than current owners? Each manufacturer (especially car makers but this applies to nearly any consumer item) that has a database of buyers is uniquely prepared for moulding their online reputation around current — and satisfied — owners.

How? Well, thanks to the Internet, these owners now have a say. Whether its online at a manufacturer website or on their personal blog, current customers have already voted with their hard-earned cash. Give them a positive experience, and they’ll spend money again. And again.

Do a search for Zappos or Jet Blue. Read how well they treat their customers. They’ve created a feedback loop that benefits both current customers, future products, and their bottom line. The large majority of that feedback exists on the company website, not in the comments section of a popular blog or letters section of a large newspaper.

I’m increasingly of the opinion that while critical opinion is necessary — especially with a big purchase like a car — manufacturers are wasting time and money by catering to writers with large or focused audiences but little pull in terms of who actually purchases the items.

Want an example? I reviewed the Chevrolet Camaro and was completely flamed by members of a Camaro-focused Internet forum. Critically I was — and still am — correct in my assessment…but who really cares? Despite my Google pagerank, journalistic integrity, and, say, Twitter reach, I was completely outgunned by the cousin lovin’ Camaro faithful.

The media is currently infatuated with the Toyota recall, but you know what? If Toyota puts their customers first, I’m of the opinion it’ll all blow over. To test this, I called a local dealership (no, I don’t own a Toyota), explained that I was out of town, I heard about a recall, and was wondering if my vehicle was safe to drive home.

It was obviously a very small sample size of one, but the service manager’s response was calm, engaging, and honest. He explained the problem occurred in a small number of vehicles, that the company would likely have replacement parts ready in time for when I “got home,” and gave me clear instructions on what to do if the accelerator did stick.

If every current Toyota customer is treated like I was, they’ll be O.K.

Manufacturers and marketers, use the power of your customers. Market to them first. Make them happy. Let them try out new products before members of the press, have them contribute to a company-hosted Internet forum, and engage in discussing both faults and ways to improve. Be open.

There are studies that show it’s far less expensive to keep current customers than to get new ones. It’s absolutely true. For the first time, companies can create their own forums to cultivate feedback. Done correctly, and that feedback will rival anything a large media company attains in terms of traffic. Better still, in time Google results will skew toward your site.

We’re in a strange place now, at least as far as automotive writing goes, where hack bloggers and hack mainstream reporters are rubbing shoulders at the same event. Everyone is fighting to create buzz, upstage “the other guy,” and remain relevant. It was never so apparent as when Hurd spoke the quote above.

I say to the people in charge of creating buzz for your products: forget catering to people who are at your event because of the Air Miles accumulation, bragging rights, fine-food buffet tendencies, or love of swag. Despite being some of the best, don’t invite journalists just because they’re cool, have won a Pulitzer, or represent an alt-lifestyle.

Make the real writers work for a story — as the best ones always do. But don’t make your customers work to tell you their story.

When I read about scientists discovering a new newt, black hole or positing an idea of another universe, I immediately think: “Well, how are we discovering something now if this thing probably existed before calendars and clocks?”

It’s “now” I’d like to talk about.

If something is really important to you, don’t you drop everything and deal with it immediately? You know, things that shock and challenge your very core. A death in the family, an angry bear, a flat tire, a dirty diaper?

Now.

If that’s the case, and if the really important things in life happen independent of fixed time, then setting a due date for something is really just a way of telling yourself it’s not important. Why? Because you won’t be doing it now, but later.

When we try and do only things that are important to us, more will get done. We’ll have more capacity for the things we love. And we’ll finally be free of time.

There is no time in now, only is.

“The secret of happiness, you see, is not found in seeking more, but in developing the capacity to enjoy less” — Socrates

You may read Life Hacker, Unclutterer, or any number of productivity-slash-lifestyle sites and ask yourself, “Well just how can some people live like that?”

It’s pretty easy, actually. I don’t have much — major possessions include a computer, camera, Arcee (my cat!), desk, futon, and bed. My car is in storage. I have a large one bedroom apartment that has no photos on the walls. It’s still unpainted. (Well, painted…but eggshell.)

The things I don’t have are numerous: I have a television, it’s a spectacular, flickering, 13-inch Scott model with one speaker — but I don’t have cable. I have a Playstation 2, but own maybe four games. Counting my desk chair, I own five places to sit. No coffee tables, no book shelves, no dressers, no side tables. I do have a desk and kitchen table…but that’s it for major surfaces.

Basically, if I wasn’t worried about breaking things, I could pack everything I own into the back of a cube van.

You know what? I’m looking to downsize. I figure I can do without my bed, the broken stereo in the corner, old computer monitor, subwoofer, many of my clothes, trinkets, suitcases, shoes, and barbecue.

I’ve been looking for a small studio or bachelor apartment in Toronto, without a parking spot. I’ll get a good mattress for my futon, some book shelves, an enclosed litter box for the cat…and that’s it. Sure, I’ll paint the new place and (finally) put up pictures, but why fill it with a bunch of crap?

Not having a ton of money helps, but I think even if I was wealthy I’d live in a small space. Why? This sort of lifestyle is opt-in. You have to be very cognisant of what you purchase, where you live, how you spend your time, and most importantly what makes you happy.

Let’s repeat that: You have to know what makes you happy.

Friends, family, travel, reading, music, photography, being creative, and my cat keep me happy.

Cleaning makes me sad. Vacuuming sucks. Don’t get me started on dishes. I see a large apartment filled with stuff as a burden. Really. How people overextend themselves in order to live in a new four bedroom house in a McMansion subdivision is completely beyond me.

Something like a big screen TV would be nice, sure. I’d really enjoy playing Gran Turismo or whatever on it. But I also see the downsides, like: how will I pay for it? How much extra will my electricity bill be? Will I want to buy a Playstation 3? Will I want digital cable? Where will I put it? How much time will I spend in front of it?

That brings up another problem: as a “creative type,” I’m already a professional procrastinator. In many ways, being successful depends on keeping that side of my psyche at bay just long enough to get something done.

In some ways, I see a parallel between hoarding large amounts of crap (both in possessions and emotions) with procrastination. Our society prides itself in putting things off — credit cards let you pay later, the culmination of four hours of reality TV is revealed over eight weeks of half hour segments (minus commercials, of course), education is defined by future deadlines (“You must learn this, by this date!”), and pay raises are usually awarded on tenure…not performance.

“If I stay here at Acme Packaging & Co. just a little bit longer…”

A society obsessed with procrastination and consumerism driven by not feeling good enough points to only one thing: we don’t like who we are, and we’re all really, really scared of death. Especially of dying alone. And, when I die…who gets my stuff?

What if we had no stuff to give? What if what we left behind were positive memories of what we’d accomplished in life? What if the people we loved weren’t stuck sorting through years of unused possessions? Or worse, fighting between each other for control of a dead guy’s crap?

I live without much, but I can do better. I can downsize. Having fewer things means more space for the things that matter. I can’t take my stuff with me when I’m dead…but I can sure as hell leave a lot of love, compassion, and memories behind for the people I care about…a task made much easier when there’s not a 42-inch television competing for my attention.

Maybe there’s a little more to living simply after all.

If you liked this, check out:

• mnmlist.com
• zenhabits.com
• unclutterer.com
• “Small space living by design,” latimes.com
• “The art of living in small spaces,” backwoodshome.com
• “Small cool contest 2009,” apartmenttherapy.com
• “The smallest apartment in Manhattan,” latimes.com“

I voraciously consume books on language and linguistics. What I lack on the subject from a formal education is partly compensated by my enthusiasm for the subject and my constant desire to learn more.

What does this have to do with you? While reading Steven Pinker’s book, “The Stuff of Thought,” I was surprised and delighted to have two of my interests dovetail; namely, the Internet and language:

The distinction between predicating and referring can be given a price. The most successful new corporation in this century so far is Google, which made its fortune by actually selling noun phrases. […] So together with the results of an untainted web search, Google displays a few commercially sponsored sites relevant to the search term at the edges of the screen. Companies pay for this privilege by bidding in a continuous auction for the terms most likely to send eyeballs to their site. As a connoisseur of plurals, I was intrigued to learn that they cost more than singulars. Digital camera can be bought for seventy-five cents a click, whereas digital cameras fetches a dollar and eight cents. The advertisers know that the plural is more likely to be typed by people who are planning to buy a digital camera, though they don’t know why. The reason is that a bare noun like digital camera is generic, and is likely to be typed by someone who wants to know how they work. A plural like digital cameras is more likely to be referential, and typed by someone who wants to know about the kinds that are out there and how to get one. — Steven Pinker, “The Stuff of Thought”

The ways in which language and our behaviour are linked is fascinating. Have you noticed yourself serving as an example to the point above?

A more obvious example is by trying to detect the subtle shifts in language based on your mood. For instance, when I’m content with my cat, I call her by her name: “Arcee.” When I’m upset?

“Stop that, cat.”

I’ve noticed parents doing the same thing when talking to other parents. Nobody says, “My kid got an A.” Instead: “Billy got an A.”

In my experience, the opposite is true: “My kid is in detention,” rather than: “Billy is in detention.”

Required reading:

• Steven Pinker’s official website
• Video: Steven Pinker on language and thought
• Video: Authors@Google: Steven Pinker
• Wikipedia: Steven Pinker
• Link: The Luxuriant Flowing Hair Club for Scientists

Why?

For me, sound is both a huge benefit and massive curse. When I was younger, my then-substitute teacher mother was on a maternity placement, teaching grade 6 or 7. I say 6 or 7 because I have no idea. All I know is that a) they were older than me and b) my mother will correct me after reading this.

At the time, she was worried that I had little interest in music. (Damn SNES!) So she polled her students for their favourites, visited a music store on the way home, and gifted me with two cassette tapes: “Gordon” by the Barenaked Ladies and “Metallica” by Metallica.

(Yeah, my mom bought me Metallica. Jealous?)

Both sparked a love for music I can’t really explain. After listening to both, I was initially attracted to the album “Gordon,” with its catchy lyrics and pop hooks. But the more I listened, the less impressed I became. In went Metallica’s self-titled, so-called “Black Album.”

“…Rhythms can induce a trance like state that helps with the flow state. Emotional music can be selected to harmonize with the artistic effect that you are trying to achieve. The words of songs can occupy the conscious mind and give it something else to focus on so that the subconscious is given free range” — Nick Pagan, via designer-daily.com

I was hooked. Metallica opened the doors (and my Ghostbusters wallet) to albums by The Offspring, Nirvana, Stone Temple Pilots, and Soundgarden. Silverchair and Alice in Chains followed. Weezer opened my eyes to how rewarding pop could be, and I dropped some coin on the latest Greenday, Presidents of the United States of America, Spin Doctors, and Spacehog.

One of my friends got me into Britpop; Elastica and Oasis were incredible — but I still own every Blur track released. Since then, my taste has become more diverse; I’ve added lots of rap and jazz to my catalogue. My dad loaned me some blues, and let me play his old records: The Who, Led Zeppelin, and Wishbone Ash are some of my favourites.

Through all of this musical education, some things happened. I was in a boys choir, then a quartet. Really. I also learned how to play guitar just well enough to sing and strum along with “Modern Life is Rubbish.”

The blessing? I’m at my most creative when music is around.

The curse? The opposite is true: when I started in my work career, I found working in an office environment extremely difficult. I find auto shows a huge drain on my energy levels. When interviewing someone, I’m easily thrown off by noise. My friends can attest to the fact I’m not very good company on a busy street corner, and have trouble concentrating.

Are you the same way? Take a look at this short video shot at TED, presented by author and sound consultant Julian Treasure, about the ways sound affects us.

A few years ago, I had the pleasure of interviewing Tonmeister Geoff Martin. Canadian-born, his day job is working in research and development in the Acoustics division of Bang & Olufsen a/s in Denmark. We crossed paths during an interview on Audi’s new Bang & Olufsen sound systems. A colleague mentioned the “guy who tuned the system is Canadian,” so naturally, I had to interview Martin as well.

Our brief chat brought to light many amazing things about sound, not least of which was its immense complexity. Beyond the technical side of things, and confirming Treasure’s presentation, is that sound has the capacity to affect our actions. In Martin’s case, at the most simplistic was tuning the Audi system to naturally compensate for road noise, so the driver wasn’t constantly fiddling with the volume.

What does this have to do with you? Simple: try working with music on, because it can affect your work performance. I like it loud. (Good headphones are essential — most earbuds are pathetic…) Hand craft a playlist of your favourites and see if it helps. Like when you’re working out, jogging, or driving, music can be helpful in focusing your attention to the task at hand.

What say you? Do you like music when you’re working? Genre? Artist? (Miley Cyrus recommendations will be dealt with using extreme prejudice…)

What’s this? My current turn-it-up-loud-and-get-shit-done track, by Winter Gloves

Required reading + tweeting

• Julian Treasure’s blog
• “Fine tuning for perfection,” an article I did on Geoff Martin and the Bang & Olufsen Audi A8 car stereo
• Tonmeister.ca, Geoff Martin’s website
• “Should we listen to music while we’re working?” at designer-daily.com
• “The mystery of good working music” at loudthinking.com
• Presentation: “The Power of Sound” by Bob McCurdy
• Study: “The Language of Music: Working with Children on the Autism Spectrum” by Stephen M. Shore

Like this man here, I'm also interested in things other than cars…

When I started my website 1.2 million years ago, I was primarily interested in cars. Actually, I was interested in many things, but cars seemed like the cool thing to talk about.

Now, I feel I’ve developed enough of an online presence (and as a writer!) to talk about things that I’m interested in, besides cars. So I’ve been working on this sorta-snazzy update with the hopes of featuring more of the design, music, tech, events, and social media stuff I’m interested in.

You’ll slowly start to see things move around, and styles get updated (many of the old articles are sorta weird-looking), but this is the direction I’m going in. Deal with it.

Car stuff will be mostly confined to editorial pieces, photos, and my podcast; check out my Car Chat blog for the latest and greatest. Since I make a living writing about cars, you’ll hopefully understand it’s a bore to talk about them on my personal website, on Car Chat, and for paid work.

If you have any suggestions or ideas, leave them in the comments below. Thanks for your continued support — it’s been a pleasure to connect with everyone through the years.