I grew up in Texas. (It’s no secret if you hear me talk). Forget the podcasts, my relaxed language is tinged with y’alls and drawls. And yes, y’all has both plural and possessive form in case you were curious. I do a pretty good job of keeping it on the down low at work, but there’s always that occasional “fixin’ to” that gives me away. Well, the thing about being a girl growing up in a rough-and-tumble state is that you’re taught to be one tough little cookie. I was playing baseball (the hardball sort) when I was 7 or 8, riding my PawPaw’s horses at 4 or 5, and roughing up the neighborhood boys during tackle football games.

I don’t think I realized I was a girl until at least 14.

My first brush with discovering my X-chromosome origins came when I was about 6 years old. I inadvertently discovered that boys and girls are different after taking my shirt off while outside on a scorching summer day.

While my mom was out getting some much-needed sanity, I was at the baby-sitter sweltering in the sun playing hide-and-seek with the neighborhood kids. So as the boys started taking off their sweat-soaked shirts, I, of course, thought it was okay for me to do the same.

Imagine my surprise when I was sternly grabbed by an arm and whisked off to hastily locate my top.

“BUT HEEEEEEEEE DID IT?!” I’m sure I wailed.

“WHY CAN’T AYYYYYYYE???”

I had just been unceremoniously introduced to the concept that “life isn’t fair.” Especially for girls.

So when I came across TEDWomen this week, it was a mix of excitement and reservation. On the one hand, I soak up TED Talks like some people soak up Appletinis. Gotta have my daily fix, and watching TEDs over lunch is becoming habit-forming. My podcasts always feature my latest favorite Talk, and some weeks it’s hard to decide which one to choose.

There are so many incredible people and TED knows how to find them. TED rocks. (There’s a concert idea in that).

But at the same time, since my sunny days as a rabble-rousing girls-libber in the Lone Star State, I’ve always been firmly against segregation or propping up. Singling out specific segments of the population in veiled (or blatant) coddling efforts does more harm than good.

Making special allowances is the equivalent of saying one group isn’t as able, isn’t as driven, isn’t as intelligent, and therefore needs a hand up.

I can feel that 6 year-old seething inside.

While it may improve things in the short-term (and there’s no arguing that Affirmative Action has helped a lot of people and you can’t paint everything with the same brush), in the long-term it generally reinforces the negative perception that created the disparity in the first place. I’m against discrimination and strongly believe pointing out differences in an effort to make compensation only perpetuates the behavior or attitudes you want to discourage.

It seems women haven’t made it as far as we’d thought. Reading from the TEDWomen web page, I felt us go slipping backward about 30 years.

And then there was this line on the website that felt like it was either catering to a right-brain/left-brain stereotype, or the ambitious, competitive, testosterone-fueled hunter male vs. the communicative, nurturing, berry-gathering female. Do we really need to go back there?

I thought that’s what the original TED was about, except for the part about focusing on women being different. Every speaker on TED is different and unique… different nationalities, different ages, different educations, different genders. In past events have women’s speeches been less innovative and dynamic? Is women’s thinking less relevant to the broader audience?

Now my inner 6 year-old is really wound up.

Or maybe TED just wants to create a venue where women can talk about “womany” issues like poverty, sickness, art, and motherhood. If they’re truly ideas worth spreading, why wouldn’t they be integrated into TED? Or create topic-driven events like TEDBusiness, TEDSocial, TEDCulture, or hey, TEDucation.

TED is about bringing together a wide variety of perspectives and influence, and until TEDWomen, I thought it was also free of borders and conventional boundaries. It always felt like TED was about great ideas rising to the top, no matter where or who they came from. Now that there’s a separate event, it’s only going to encourage further segregation, and ultimately a watering down of the TED brand.

Or worse, the original TED will be viewed as the pinnacle event, with presenters at the top of the thinking in their fields, and TEDWomen being viewed as the also-rans.

I’m sure it seemed like a good idea at the time, but the way to honor and highlight women isn’t by separating them. It’s by deeper inclusion. And considering TED is all about ideas, there was bound to be a better one for achieving it.

Will women resent having to choose between attending a TED conference and a TEDWomen conference?

Will female presenters feel they’re being slighted by being invited to TEDWomen instead of TED?

Will male presenters be invited to TEDWomen?

What are some ideas that would have highlighted women thinkers in TED without segregating them?

One of the things that’s so inspiring about the Information Age is that the possibilities for an individual are limitless. A college drop-out created one of the world’s most powerful companies. A college kid came up with a billion dollar operation out of his dorm room, (and at 26 years old he’s running it). A child from a broken home who didn’t know his father grew up to be president of the United States.

Is there anything that can’t be done? When ideas are what create success, can we afford to judge anyone based on their pedigree, education, or age?

As was predicted, in the new millennium ideas became currency.

In an environment that has evolved to value ideas, every day is a new opportunity to change the world, to be a catalyst for growth, to build something amazing. The ease and speed at which we’re now able to connect is what makes most of these dreams possible.

What’s small is big, and what’s big is flat. Ideas spread like a blaze in the wind, and the strength of our connections allows us to leverage those ideas into something greater, faster.

That was until the chilling effect of “influence.”

It’s ironic that Fast Company, a brand known for highlighting the speed of great ideas, would create and promote an idea like the Influence Project. Because it’s ushering in a new craze over superficial influence that’s unhealthy to the ecosystem that supports the growth of ideas, and it threatens the intricate and delicate networks that allow ideas to move so quickly.

The new fascination with who’s influential, who’s not, who’s got clout, and who doesn’t, and the ability to filter people out of your life based on a number is unhealthy for a community. The long-term result of the Influence Project, as well as Hootsuite’s Klout scoring and filtering, is going to be a social media ecosystem that gets even more strongly segregated into cliques.

Am I the only one who hates cliques? Or having your value as a thinker, idea person, and sharer crunched into a cold, inhuman number?

With Hootsuite’s Klout tool, it’s too easy to filter out followers, and limit conversations to only people who are in the highest quartile of “influencers.” Does this honestly benefit anyone? Or does it encourage us to all become focused on influence?

With a rise in artificial influence-seeking behaviors like spamming contests and ignoring followers who have low Klout scores, the sharing and mixing of many disparate people and ideas (something we just recently gained) and the quest for social media trust will both be lost, and the new currency will no longer be ideas, but numbers and the perception of influence.

Sure, filtering by Klout can be useful to brand community managers who want to identify influencers within the community for strategic seeding. But when everyone in the entire community is using the technology to shut out “the noise” of everyone below the Klout number they “respect,” we’ll have a community that’s no longer driven by sharing and connecting, but by popularity.

The loss will be great.

In this TED video by Matt Ridley, “When Ideas Have Sex,” he talks about how important it is that ideas are shared and combined. I especially loved his concept of the genetic inheritance of an idea. By allowing them to co-mingle, the best parts of ideas come together to form a new, better idea.

A lot of ideas that could have and would have connected, won’t. A lot of people who could have benefited each other (in ways that have nothing to do with influence) will never come together because at least one of them couldn’t be bothered.

It’s actually disheartening. I’ve seen remarks about annoyance with “followers seeking validation” by trying to connect or be heard. (Connect? Be heard? How dare they?!) Or the other blogger who tweeted how the people trying hardest to connect “probably deserve it the least.” I’m guessing those are the types Klout was designed for. It shouldn’t be a surprise they both have high follower counts. But what they’re gaining in “influence” they’re losing in trust, relationships, and access to ideas outside the echo chamber.

Join the Conversation…

Has Klout scoring affected who you interact with and how you interact with them?

Is there an innovative way to counteract an unhealthy focus on scored influence?

Does crowdsourcing represent the physical embodiment of the democratic sharing and mixing of ideas?

Will there come a time when Klout scores are automatically attached to our name on interactions across the internet?

Hootsuite. Old Spice. Ann Taylor. MailChimp. The First Amendment. Did you miss anything last week? Keep your finger on the pulse of social media and what’s next in marketing with The BrandForward Top 10 Podcast. It’s packed full of the week’s top stories, video memes, TV spots, and breaking social media developments on the web. Everything is condensed into a news-style podcast, available on iTunes each Monday. To subscribe, search “brandforward” in the iTunes store.

Podcast

Please note: This embedded player is Flash-based. iPhone, iPod, and iPad users can access the podcast directly through the iTunes store.

Podnotes

10. Award-Winning Creative is 11X More Effective.

9. Writers Beginning to Circumvent Traditional Publishers, Go Directly to iTunes Store.

8. 2010 Holiday Shopping Season Predictions Point to Curtailed Spending.

7. Apple Defends Against “Antennagate” Accusations.

6. MySpace Recreates Profiles to Resemble Facebook.

5. U.S. Appeals Court Strikes Down 2004 FCC Indecency Policy.

4. Hootsuite Launches New Features, Inspires Criticism.

3. Man Sues Facebook for 84% of the Company.

2. Old Spice Viral Video Tweets Take Internet By Storm.

1. Reports Show Creativity in American Children is Dropping.

BrandForward Recommended: Blog Posts & Articles

Adweek: “Maybe the Midlife Crisis Isn’t Bogusky’s” by Warren Berger

Advertising Age: “It’s Time to Prepare For the End of the Web As We Know It.” by Steve Rubel

BrandForward Recommended: TED Talk

“When Ideas Have Sex” by Matt Ridley. 16 minutes

BrandForward Recommended Presentations:

This Week’s Apps

Google App Inventor

FaceTime Portrait

Firefox Home iPhone App

This Week’s Spots to Watch

American Express: “Open – Reveille”

Videos Worth Watching

Google “App Inventor” Demo




Facebook Theatrical Trailer




Apple Fan Video: Antennagate




Brigham Young University: BLL Library Old Spice Parody Video

Marketing Technology

MailChimp Adds Facebook Like Button To Email Campaigns

Consumer Technology

Apollo News Aggregator

Social Media Promotion

Ann Taylor’s “25% Off For Mayors” Foursquare Promotion

To report a news story or event, or to recommend a book, blog, or video for next week, send a tweet to @michelletripp or label your tweet with #brandforward.

itpc://feeds.feedburner.com/brandforward

DDB Sweden earned one of three Cyber Grand Prix awards at Cannes with the whimsical, yet acutely strategic “The Fun Theory” campaign. But there’s something more at work here than just clever consumer amusement. This is an example of a brand and agency engaging in the future of marketing by crafting a brand experience and bringing it to life.

Beyond the stated goal of creating interest in its BlueMotion technology, Volkswagen illustrates the strong tie between the brand and the brand experience. Helping commuters have fun while getting from one place to another… an ingenious symbolic connection between a spontaneous moment while walking to where you’re going, and the act of driving from one place to another in a vehicle.

The video of the slide shows how the Volkswagen team converted a long flight of stairs into a big red slide.

And here’s another example where stairs were turned into piano keys. Commuters were encouraged to make music as they walked up and down.

It might seem like fun and games, but there’s something a lot deeper at work than child’s play.

It’s obviously not just about helping consumers get from the top of the stairs to the bottom, or making music on steps. And while it’s supposed to be about BlueMotion technology, I don’t see a compelling connection between the Fun Theory “experiment” and educating consumers on BlueMotion. It feels like it’s missing some legs.

But it really doesn’t matter. Because the campaign did something much more profound. It reminded consumers that getting from one place to another should be fun. And showed them that there’s a choice. Take the boring stairs or go down the fun slide.

And that Volkswagen understands this and creates that same sense of fun and enjoyment in its vehicles.

Are creatives in the industry ready to think like event marketers?

Now more than ever, brands must be in touch with their core value and true promise in order to create relevant experiences that capture the essence and drive the brand. But they also need to see far beyond traditional advertising, look past the buzz of online social media, and understand that today’s consumer isn’t going to respond to brand lip service. They’re going to respond to being engaged… being physically, mentally, and emotionally connected through real interaction.

Whether it’s Ford’s Fiesta Movement or Old Spice’s viral video event. Whether it’s a Farmville game or Foursquare. As advertisers, we’re no longer just managing the message, increasingly we’ll be driving brands through creating experiences.

Can you think of any other agencies or brands that already get it? What are they doing that genuinely engages the consumer?

These days, trends pop fast. And they fade fast. Before you’ve even had a chance to run down to the mall, the latest craze is already sitting in the garbage bin out back. Tossed aside like last season’s undersized clutch. So, what’s this year’s latest has-been item? Apparently it’s “authenticity.” It was all the rage 10 months ago, everyone had to have it. But now the mere whisper of authenticity and you get tweyeballed like the kid who wore Garanimals to 8th grade.

Yes, authenticity is apparently over. But never fear, just like the fashion world always has something new to replace the old, social media is trotting out its new must-have accessory:

Influence.

And the first superstar to strut it down the runway, Fast Company.

You know how there’s haute couture… artfully designed, carefully handcrafted, and respected for its simple elegance…. there’s also the knock-offs. Cramped and flattened in a fluorescently lit back room with a 6-foot ceiling in Chinatown. The ones that scream “Buy me! I’m only $50!”

Versus the ones you’d have to save for dutifully before being able to own.

Well that’s pretty much the gist of the Fast Company Influence Project.

Grab it now, grab it fast, grab it cheap. It’ll fall apart on you in a couple of months, but it looks really shiny right now!

Before I proceed to rail on the Influence Project, let me first say that I love Fast Company. Since the day I picked up my first issue I’ve been hopelessly attached to it and everything it’s stood for… brilliant entrepreneurs, technologies that change the world, innovative ideas and strategies that create empires. What’s a girl not to love?

So when happening upon the Influence Project, I was intrigued. Although, the name did give me a little pause because I’ve already been hesitant to embrace the whole Klout thing. But that’s another story.

After a few minutes of inspection, the first offense in this whole Fast Company “digital don’t” was readily visible. The experiment has a misleading name. Not sure how that happened, but I’m guessing someone didn’t have the dictionary app installed on their iPhone.

Because the definition of Influence is very different from the activity and result promoted in the Influence Project.

Influence:
1. A power affecting a person, thing, or course of events, especially one that operates without any direct or apparent effort. 2. Power to sway or affect based on prestige, wealth, ability, or position.

(From freedictionary.com)

Frankly, I don’t think they meant the “ability” to schedule auto tweets or mass DMs.

I’m not sure how “tricking, spamming, or begging people into clicking on your link as many times as possible” is anywhere near the same universe as influence. At least not true influence. And to see social media tweeps discuss their “formula” for trying to win the competition only reinforces its superficiality.

What would have been more befitting of a pro-business, pro-ethics, pro-future publication that’s trying to maintain relevance in the face of stiff digital competition would have been an experiment in something more profound and meaningful:

Engagement.

Well, they were scooped. Because a mere week after the flimsy Influence Project rolled out,
Old Spice p0wned the influence space with its viral video tweets. Real influence through real engagement. It couldn’t have come at a better time, making a clear distinction between “white hat” influence and “black hat” influence.

It’s really sad that Fast Company felt it needed what amounts to a “rickroll for business geeks” to get people to click onto its site. Fast Company is better than that. And a lot of the people who’ve signed up for it are better than that. I’m on that list. I’m an unapologetic social media joiner. I’m not going to say “Oh gee whiz, I wish I hadn’t signed up but oops! I already did so now I’ll just sheepishly apologize as my photo grows bigger.” I was curious. I was interested. I thought it seemed a little sketchy. But I did it anyway.

I posted my link on Twitter a few times until it started to feel icky. Icky as in I didn’t want to have to post it 20 times a day to make sure every follower saw the link and clicked on it. I didn’t want to get my hands dirty by doing something that went from “innocent fun” to not feeling right.

I didn’t want to sacrifice relationships just to send people I care about to a project I don’t believe in. I didn’t want to artificially leverage trust for something that’s really nothing more than an opportunity to see who’s got the biggest ego and the most lemmings. Or how high Fast Company’s traffic can shoot up between now and August 15th when the competition ends.

Me and my connections have better things to do with our time.

Like participating in the “real” influence project… tweeting the Old Spice man.

YouTube, Facebook, Domino’s, Fast Company, Nissan, Bing. Did you miss anything last week? Keep your finger on the pulse of social media and what’s next in marketing with The BrandForward Top 10 Podcast. It’s packed full of the week’s top stories, video memes, TV spots, and breaking social media developments on the web. Everything is condensed into a news-style podcast, available on iTunes each Monday. To subscribe, search “brandforward” in the iTunes store.

Podcast

Please note: This embedded player is Flash-based. iPhone, iPod, and iPad users can access the podcast directly through the iTunes store.

Podnotes

10. Twitter Exploring Possibility of Promoted Tweets for Individual Users.

9. YouTube Aiming To Become Entertainment Content Portal.

8. Facebook Users Experiencing Facebook Fatigue.

7. Teens Experiencing Facebook Fatigue.

6. One in Four Americans Surf Internet While Watching TV.

5. Google Secretly Invests $100 Million In Zynga to Prepare For Launch of Google Games.

4. Domino’s Launches “Real Beauty” Campaign For Pizza.

3. YouTube Looking For Reality TV Style Content on July 24th.

2. Foursquare Launches Layered Locations Feature.

1. Fast Company Launches Controversial “Influence Project.

BrandForward Recommended: Blog Posts & Articles

Mashable: “5 Social Media Trends to Watch Right Now” by Barb Dybwad

CFO.com: “The Cost of Social Media Phobia.” by David McCann

BrandForward Recommended: TED Talk

“Let’s Raise Kids to be Entrepreneurs” by Cameron Herold. 22 minutes

This Week’s Apps

Dunkin’ Run

Ben & Jerry’s “Scoop of Happiness”

Status Magic

This Week’s Spots to Watch

Microsoft Bing: “Los Links”