The Big Pixel

Long Island

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Tue, 31 May 2011 17:18:00 +0000

While spending Memorial Day in Fire Island, I realized how weird a name Long Island really is. We say it all the time and never actually think about the name itself. Long Island. It's nothing more than a very basic topographical description of land. You won't appreciate the humor unless you can imagine yourself having a conversation with a Native American hundreds of years ago. [He has a stereotypically heavy Native American accent]

Me: "Hello Chief, where are you from?"

Chief: "Long Island."

You see what I mean? It's pretty weird.

Twitter defines real fame.

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Fri, 20 May 2011 19:37:00 +0000

Twitter has made the definiton of fame crystal clear. If your death doesn't become a trending topic, you're not famous. Simple as that. A few hours ago Macho Man Randy Savage died, and now #ripmachoman, Savage, and Slim Jim are all trending on Twitter. That guy was truly famous! A big part of his fame came from his work as the spokesperson for Slim Jim, which is extra special for me because I worked for the guys that created the "Snap into a Slim Jim" campaign. That aside, it's amazing how Twitter and fame go hand in hand. #JustSayin'

The iPad of Yesteryear

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Sun, 09 Jan 2011 20:07:00 +0000

The other night I was at a party and someone went to change the music. Right as they went to hit "next track" the song advanced on its own. Was this magic? A new piece of technology? Something from the future? Nope. It was just my friend across the room using a remote control. Everyone turned their heads for a second, realized it was a remote control, and returned to normal conversation. But I couldn't. I felt like I was thrust back to some 1970's party, where the host was a super rich mogul who silenced the room with his magical remote control. All the guests stared at the host like he was a deity, waving his Jetsonian remote in the air. It was the iPad of yesteryear. I imagine it debuted at The World's Fair, and some sort of larger than life character captivated an entire audience. "Ladies and Gentlemen, what I'm about to show is going to change the way we control our appliances. It will allow you to change the channel from the couch, switch frequencies from your mattress, and impress countless women across the world. Allow me to introduce you to The Remote Control!" It's mind-boggling how something so revolutionary became so ordinary. The iPad is no different. When our children stumble across an iPad commercial in 2050, they're going to laugh, show their friends, and buy one off eBay to use as Halloween accessory. So next time you change the channel, remember you're holding the iPad of yesteryear.

Mother Nature. Father Time.

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 17:47:00 +0000

I woke up this morning and couldn't get this out of my head. Mother Nature and Father Time. I don't know why and don't know what it means. What happens if they have a kid? Does the 7-year itch ever occur? Are there any rainy days? If the weather is always good and time flies when you're having fun does their relationship have any legs? I don't know. So many questions.

LOL LOST

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 19:26:00 +0000

LOL LOST its meaning. Now if you laugh from something someone wrote to you, you have to respond with "I literally just laughed out loud." So what happened to LOL? It's been marginalized, falling between "haha" and the seemingly endless "hahahahhahahaha." It's amazing how we've taken our spoken language and made so many different iterations of the written word to best replicate it. Let's not forget about the capitalized "HAHAHAHAHAHAH." That one means that you are smiling really big, but not "literally laughing out loud." I can't wait to see what happens when people try to communicate sadness the same way. That should be "wah wah."

haha

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 15:07:00 +0000

Over the past decade communication transitioned from speech to type, and I thought it appropriate to spend a little time honoring the most malleable word of the past decade haha. Haha is the one word that can be used in any conversation and the recipient will never truly know the inflection of the sender.

Let's say you're chatting with someone; you've got a million things on your plate, no time for them, and they just made a really bad joke. Simply respond with haha or hahahah and they'll never know you're totally ignoring them. However, haha can be a truly genuine word too.

If you and a friend are chatting and they tell you a funny story, haha is a heartfelt response. It's akin to American culture in genreal. Haha is the typed version of the obligatory laugh. The laugh performed after any face to face or phone conversation that veers off course. It's disarming and we as Americans learn from a young age that it's imperative to be friendly and smiley all the time even if it's totally phony. So thank you haha. HAHA!

The Realist: A Pessimist in an Optimist's clothing.

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 04:31:00 +0000

The dictionary definition of a realist is "a person who tends to view or represent things as they really are." Isn't that inherently limiting? Doesn't that mean they take reality and probability into account? Can anything incredible be achieved by a realist? Was Einstein, Spielberg, Obama, Hawking or anyone who's done anything impressive a realist? I think not.

Realists are nothing more than pessimists in optimists' clothing. They hate to admit they're pessimists, so they created "realism." Sure, realists may not be Debbie Downers like some stereotypical pessimists, but at the end of they day, they can't believe in the impossible. And if you can't believe in the impossible then you can't achieve it.

It's a small lifestyle

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:44:00 +0000

For years I've heard the expression "It's a small world," but in reality it's not at all; it's a small lifestyle. We all, whether we're lower, middle or upper class all tend to stay in our sphere.

If someone travels to a 5 star Caribbean hotel and runs into someone they know the first thing they'll say is "oh my, what a small world we live in!" It's not a small world! It's a small lifestyle.

We're about to hit 7 billion people and if I ever run into the Vietnamese tow truck driver I met in LA again, that's a small world!

Communication Priorities

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 03:27:00 +0000

Nowadays there are so many ways to communicate it's almost impossible to know which method to use. To the unknowing outsider, they all seem similar, but under further scrutiny, the intricacies of present day communication become apparent. Phone calls, text messages, BBMs, e-mails, IM's, GChats, Facebook messages, wall posts, pokes and friend requests are all very unique ways of communicating, and it's very hard to know which one to use and when.

Let's go back a few decades and realize that our parents' generation had it GOOOOOOD! If someone said, "hey, here's my number," that was the only way to communicate. You either called, or you didn't. Each action had a very clear meaning; no call meant "not interested" and if you called it was clear that you were interested. But now we have to chose our form of passive apathy to prove that we're interested. How weird is that? How bass ackwards?

I've taken it upon myself to define the meaning of each form of communication, and how the method of communication is just as important, if not more than the content itself.

The phone call. The oldest and easiest way to convey what you're truly feeling has become risque. If you just met someone and decided to call them without establishing a text conversation beforehand you are BOLD! You're so bold that the person receiving the call might not answer, just because they have to interpret and digest the meaning the phone call.

The text message. It seems that text messaging is easiest way to open a line of communication without looking too interested. WARNING! the amount of time you wait before responding to text messages is vital to their interpretation. If you respond too quickly, then you're too interested! If you respond too late, you're totally disinterested. Find the happy medium. Also, make sure not to insinuate too much. Texts lack inflection, so you risk being misinterpreted.

BBM. BBM stands for Blackberry Messenger, the proprietary text messaging service available to Blackberry users. This technology adds a whole new dimension to text messaging because it discloses whether the recipient has read your BBM or not. That's a huge issue!! If you BBM someone and you see that they read your BBM and didn't respond, consider that a slap in the face or a swift kick in the nuts. There are many meanings to the unanswered BBM; none of them good.

E-mail. E-mail has taken on a more formal appearance given the advent of texting. If you e-mail someone, you are establishing a more mature and professional relationship. It shows that you've thought about what you wrote, and that you aren't playing text games. This is great way to work yourself into a "friends" stream of communication, because e-mail connotes maturity. E-mail also allows for lengthy explanations and more in depth conversations. It seems to be the form of flirtation chosen in a more professional environment. There's a lot of reading between the margins. ;)

IM's. AIM is a very, very sticky situation. Now that many people are logged on AIM throughout their workday, it's easy to exhaust your amount of IM time. IM's don't necessarily have that much meaning, but if you're chatting with someone you're interested in, the time between each IM is the most telling. You know the person you're IMing is sitting right in front of their computer, but they're choosing when to respond to you. The silence can mean a few things. #1 they're so swamped with work that they can only respond intermittently, #2 they are talking to many other people and you must await your response, or #3 they want to make you sweat. Either way, it can be very rewarding and can be very discouraging.

GChat. GChat is the proprietary instant messaging service provided by Google. It's very similar in nature to AIM, but it forgives slow reaction time. It's simply the newer form of instant messaging and people tend to think it's trendier. Nothing that special. In fact, the interface is weak as hell. The newness of it is the only thing attracts people.

Facebook messages. Facebook messages are a very casual way of communicating. It's sort of a social e-mailing system. If someone Facebook messages you, it's a subtle and chill way of expressing interest. It shows that you are patient and are in no need of an instant reaction. Facebook messages are a good route to prove you true apathy!
[remember that apathy is cool!]

Facebook wall posts. Wall posts are some of the most ballsy forms of communication. If you post a message like "great seeing you this weekend, had a great time" you're attempting to mark your territory with words opposed to urine. The wall post is masked as a direct message to the recipient, but since all 750 of their friends are privy to the wall, it becomes a form of bragging and making everyone aware that you spent time together, and on top of that, had a "great time!" Wall posts can really affect the way people act. No joke!

Facebook pokes. Pokes have somewhat gone by the wayside for Facebook Gen-1, but in case you did poke someone, it's brazen way of saying "hey, I like you."

The friend request. At Facebook's inception, everyone was friending everyone. People were friending people in their college they didn't even know. However, once the unwritten Facebook handbook was published, errant friending became taboo. So now it's important for people to pick and chose who and when they friend. If you friend someone that you just met, you seem very eager. If you wait a few days, you've shown you have self control, but still reaffirm your interest.

It's very very hard to communicate these days because there are so many layers and meanings. In many cases, technology has been a force for good, curing diseases, spreading information, and connecting people across the universe. In other cases, its stood in the way of basic human interaction, and that's a shame.

Textbook Google

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 05:04:00 +0000

In our society, all things bound in a textbook are considered fact. When we read war dates, accounts from the trenches, or what side was good and what side was evil, we take it as gospel. When something is printed in a textbook it's the closest we come to say, "I know that to be certain!"

However, there have been many articles concerning the veracity of Japanese textbooks. They’ve excluded and downplayed some WWII atrocities…and that changes history! This changes what Japanese schoolchildren learn to be true and factual. However, this is not the focal point of this entry, this is an example of what's quietly happening to our society since the prevalence of Google.

To no fault of their own, Google has become an incredible search engine. We type in something we're looking for, and BAM, we've got our answer within milliseconds. The only problem is, we read what Google's computerized algorithm considers to be important. I don't have any idea how the algorithm works, but I'm sure most people only look at the top results on the first or second page. We're voluntarily monopolizing Internet search and it scares me.

What if there are 50 better articles out there, but Google only considers them page six worthy? We need to diversify our search engines and our algorithms or else we're all just pooling from the same source. Google doesn't provide results in order of their veracity. Google starts to develop trends, and culls more highly trafficked sites. Notice that Wikipedia and twitter and facebook all start to accumulate above the fold? We're all reading the same textbook and there isn't an impartial authority checking the authenticity.

What's stopping Google from putting some disparaging blogs or articles about their company on the 35th page? I by no means am accusing Google of doing anything like that, I'm just making sure we're all aware that we've accepted Google as the only search engine...and that's dangerous!

2 New Telexpressions: The Digital # and The Digital High 5

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Mon, 11 May 2009 22:14:00 +0000

PREFACE: I'm posting this particular time to establish when I invented the Digital High 5 and The Digital #. I normally try to think of something insightful to write, but this time I'm just claiming ownership. [If they ever takeoff I don't want them to be unattributable.]

Giving a High 5 or a Pound (fist bump) used to only be a form of hand to hand contact, but one day after a successful client call, it all changed. I wanted to give my co-worker the corny "we just nailed that presentation" fist pound, but couldn't because he was on the phone in another state. I suddenly blurted out "Digital High 5" and pressed the #5 on the phone. The co-workers present in the room erupted in laughter and then I said "screw the Digital High 5, hey Chris, I'm giving you a Digital Pound" and hit the # key, which really got the room laughing. One co-worker said I had to do something with it and I agreed. So...I've decided to try and make Digital High 5's and #'s part of regular phone interactions.

I always thought it would be incredibly cool to start something that eventually becomes part of society; like the High 5, "See ya later alligator," or Rocks, Paper, Scissors. I have no idea how something like that starts or how to spread the word, but clearly it's the oldest form of successful viral advertising. Somewhere along the line someone coined something, and somehow that something became universal. I'm going to try to make Digital #'s and Digital High 5's part of our national vernacular. Someone was the first to say "Staycation" and that caught on quickly, so hopefully my burgeoning campaign for Digital #'s and High 5's will bear fruit. Haven't put much thought into next steps and I'm always open to suggestions.

Shop to a beat

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 03:33:00 +0000

Since the birth of the iPod and now the iPhone, people constantly have earbuds wedged into their heads. Whether on the subway, walking the streets, or shopping, more and more people’s lives have a soundtrack. It's not the most social activity, but I can attest that it turns a mundane stroll down the street into a music video. More and more people are acquiring mobile devices with mp3 players and more and more people are listening to music. That shift in behavior creates a whole new opportunity for retailers and record labels.

Music has the ability to make you feel a certain way, and it's not coincidence that some of the world's most influential brands regularly feature music in their commercials. Can you remember the last Apple or Nike commercial that didn't have some awesome background music? Probably not.

Using music to enhance a shopping experience is nothing new. Walk into an Abercrombie & Fitch and brace yourself for a cacophony of "brand appropriate" music. Maybe it’s just me, but I think taste in clothing doesn't necessarily correlate to taste in music. Generally the retailers select the right genre e.g. you don't hear rap or classical in an Abercrombie, but that doesn't mean you like what you are hearing. So how can retailers connect with different shoppers using in-store music without deferring to the current broadcast approach?

Imagine walking into an Abercrombie. [Just for the record, I don't shop there] Instead of heading directly to the table of pre-torn button downs, you approach a screen with a long list of songs ranging in genre. Next to each song is a 2D barcode. You whip out your iPhone, snap a pic of the song your want to listen to, and off you go. Your earbuds are securely fastened and you are shopping and bopping in your own world. You've attainted that perfect balance of privacy in a public space and now you actually want to spend time in the store because you are streaming some free new music you really like. Retailers love having more people in their store and record labels love having new avenues to distribute their artists. Abercrombie wins because you had a great shopping experience and reinforced their brand with cool music that's tailored for you. I don't know what to call this idea or business, but it needs a name or handle so for now let's go with Soundtrack Shopping.

You, me, and Blackberry

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:34:00 +0000

I’ve strongly considering adding a place setting at the dinner table for Blackberries. I can’t remember the last time I sat down to a meal where my guests or myself didn’t regularly check our Blackberry’s. For some people it’s possible to go 15-30 mins without glancing, but for others it’s a shameless multi-minute compulsion. Nowadays there is a constant need to be in touch and although many of us recognize this pathetic behavior, it’s virtually impossible to stop it. Blackberry is the scapegoat for this post, but I'm referring to any Smartphone, PDA, or cell phone.

Many of us justify this behavior because “we have work e-mails that need to be read” but most of the time we’re all simply surveying what else is occurring. We’re rarely content in the here and now because we assume everyone else is doing something better. With these devices we've all become opportunists, totally disregarding the etiquette that once existed about when and when not to check the Blackberry. We’ve all succumbed to the fact that we rather know what is going on elsewhere than be stuck in present.

The only time I consciously ignore my inner urge to check the Blackberry is when I am on a good date, an important face-to-face meeting with a superior, or some kind of funeral etc… I’d normally be ashamed to admit this, but given my relatively objective observations, I’m one of the better ones. I have some friends that check their Blackberry’s like a nervous tick. If they moved their eyebrows as regularly as they check their phones we’d think they’re a tad off. It’s scary how extremely pathetic and juvenile the behavior is.

I’d like to think that one day when I have a wife and children, I’ll forbid the use of Blackberries at the dinner table, but it's totally idealistic. It's digital whispering! I can’t stand it and I can’t stop it.

The facebook economy is around the corner

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:48:00 +0000

When I logged onto facebook today I saw that one of my friends created a whole photo album of t-shirts. The shirts were professionally photographed and the album title was the name of the company, Bambu Clothing. People started commenting on the pics, “I like them – where do I buy them?” This is where facebook can make serious $$$.

They let the girl upload the photos and make her pay X cents per tag. If someone clicks on the shirt they get redirected to the t-shirt company website and facebook charges another X cents. If a purchase is made, facebook makes a % of sale. This is a what a facebook economy or enhanced social networking will look like. Users and brands alike can make money.

It’s the future and it’s going to evolve with or without us.

The Value of a Voice

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 01:05:00 +0000

The other day I called my friend Josh on his work line and was shocked to hear the voice on the other end. "Josh Green's Office" said his female assistant. I laughed aloud. It was surreal hearing someone answer the phone for my 23 year-old friend who only graduated from Dartmouth 8 month prior. I felt like I dialed the CEO, not my friend, and it was then I realized the value of a voice.

Nowadays everything is digitally automated. You dial numbers for businesses and assume you are going to get a recording. It's par for the course, but it's not a sonically pleasing. Calling Josh made me appreciate how nice it is to place a phone call and hear a well spoken human being on the other end. Boom! An idea struck me. What if you could have an answering service whenever you wanted and remotely activated and deactivated it through a text message, email, or cell phone application for a nominal fee? It would be incredible! You'd have your own personal secretary whenever you needed it.

There have been so many articles published about Americans having side businesses. Someone is a teacher during the week and runs a SAT tutoring office on the weekends, or a CPA is creating proprietary tax software on the side etc... It would be such an advantage to have a human being answer your phone calls. It sounds so incredibly professional and the caller would never know the person answering your phone wasn't your own personal secretary.

So how does it work? What makes it so much different from a traditional answering service? The remote ON/OFF switch and ability to change your status on the fly.

Let's say you are a full-time businesswoman and in your free time you are writing a screenplay. You've distributed the script, established your own LLC and want producers to think you are a full-time screenwriter with a bustling office. All you have to do is send a text message to 12345 that reads "ON: Stacy Heath's office. She's in a meeting right now, may I take a message or put you through to her voicemail?" When your number gets dialed, the person answering the phone reads your message verbatim. Immediately the dialer assumes you are important and successful. So much of life is based on a first impression, and hearing a well spoken human being on the phone is the best way to start a conversation.

As soon as you want to turn the service off simply text OFF to 12345, send an email or do it via an iPhone or BlackBerry app. You can even create a schedule that coincides with your workday so you can directly receive calls starting at 7pm without manually disabling the service. You can edit the message as often as you like because it's only a text message/email/smartphone application entry away. Each person can handle many different accounts because all they do is answer the phone, redirect the call, or take a message and relay it to you via email. You can establish a monthly fee of $10-$20 or employ a pay-as-you-go or pay-per-use billing method.

This would totally change the way people approach their businesses because labor costs are so prohibitive. With this system you can effectively start a company on a shoestring budget and appear like you're hitting on all cylinders, primed and ready to conquer the world. That's the value of a voice.

Finally a 2D Breakthrough!

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:37:00 +0000

It finally happened. The standardization battle shifted. The tide changed. Scanbuy's Scanlife application will now be preloaded on all LG camera phones. For the past few years, 2D barcode companies have battled to get shelf space on camera phones to no avail. They won small battles like earning the ability to be downloaded over-the-air, but no one was able to convince a handset manufacturer to pre-install their software...until now. The problem with 2D barcodes is that no one knows anything about them. No one knows anything about them because they aren't prevalent. They aren't prevalent because no one has the software to decode them. However, all this is going to change. "It's one small step for Scanbuy, and one giant leap for the 2D barcode industry."

2D barcodes are nothing new to Japan or Europe, but they will soon be the next biggest marketing tool for brands in the US. Every brand wants their customer base to interact with their brands. Whether it's a Flash microsite or a video game, brands want consumers to spend time with them, play with them, fall in love with them. Be prepared to get barraged with campaigns that have a "snap" call to action. No longer will you have to send in a form to "enter for a chance to win," you'll just snap a photo. Want to add time to your parking meter, just snap. Want to buy movie tickets, just snap. Want to do anything, just snap. The sky is the limit!

You heard it here first, "some brand is going to leverage this technology so well it will change the whole way marketers look at 2D barcodes." The race has officially commenced.

Katie Couric the Brand

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 03:41:00 +0000

Since her big debut a couple years ago as the host of the CBS Evening News, Katie Couric has faded into the sunset. She tried to turn her morning talk show gig into a nightly news anchor position...and it didn't work. However talented a journalist Katie Couric might be, she is a victim of her own brand. For years on the Today Show, Katie perfected her role as the US's morning news gal, and in the process created an incredible brand. She was so good at what she did that no one could see her doing anything else. She was typecast.

Her brand resonated with the demographic that watches the Today Show, not Dan Rather. Katie Couric "the brand" was so well established that it was impossible for people to accept her as someone new. I'll never be able to see James Gandolfini as anyone other than Tony Soprano, and I'll never be able to buy Katie Couric as Tom Brokaw. It just ain't happening.

In what seems to be a last ditch effort to reinvent her brand, Katie Couric has gone to the chopping block. She lopped off her hair! Just the other day I caught a bit of her program and noticed that her hair vanished. She now appears much more chisel, masculine, and serious. I am not sure if this look will get her the kind of respect that she wants, but it's clearly a hail mary.

It's so bizarre that some women need to appear more masculine to be taken seriously. Rachel Maddow, Katie Couric, and Hillary Cinton all have short hair. Many female CEO's wear short haircuts too. It's no coincidence, and it's very interesting. My guess...subconscious sexism.

Tagging Products on Facebook

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 02:05:00 +0000

Many many months ago, July 2008ish, I came up with an idea to tag products on facebook. I thought this could revolutionize the way brands and consumers interact on social networks. For example, if John Smith tags 12 Mountain Dew cans, he can get one free. It's hard to imagine that a large amount of people would be compelled to spend the time tagging their products without some form of incentive. However, assuming the products were tagged, it would transform them from flat images to clickable hyperlinks. So, if you clicked on a Snickers bar you can be taken to their brand page on facebook, snickers.com, or wherever the company choses. Essentially it would completely shift the way we interact with photos on facebook. User generated product placement is the term I coined to describe this idea. I can't figure out why it hasn't happened until tonight.

I predict that facebook is currently scanning its billions of photos with software that detects all major and relevant brands. e.g. Keystone, Budweiser, Pizza Hut, Pepsi etc... and plans to offer the a brand tag/hyperlink to the companies. Let's assume they cull through all the photos and find the Taco Bell logo 12 million times on facebook. I bet they'll establish a "price per tag" and offer it to Taco Bell. Taco Bell can then create promotions, coupons, and microsites that activate once a a facebook user clicks.

Time will tell if this revenue driving platform is currently being stirred in the facebook cauldron.

The !

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:38:00 +0000

As a member of the generation that communicates through our fingers rather than our mouths, the ! has taken on a whole new meaning. After having an insightful conversation with my friends we realized there was something profoundly interesting about the ! Long gone are the days of speaking off the cuff, now we plan what we text, get a consensus from friends, and then express ourselves in 160 characters or less. James Joyce wouldn't stand a chance. For example, a text message that reads "Thanks for dinner" doesn't have the same meaning as "Thanks for dinner!" The ! adds the much needed emotion and inflection to the text message. We're evolving into a culture of concise communication, and we're losing our individuality simultaneously.

Our voices have a range of !'s, but texting makes them all equal. It makes everyone seem similar, when in reality they're not. Sometimes I want to give a 1/2 !, but have to resort to the full ! However creative one might be, they're still limited by text messaging.

In the flirting/dating phases of a relationship, it all boils down to the ! No one wants to be in a situation where someone could have added !, but didn't. It's insulting, painful, and so much more powerful than it needs to be. Maybe the sender had a good night but didn't want to sound too excited; too bad. You have to make a choice. It's either, "I had fun tonight too" or "I had fun tonight too!" Texting is great for people that don't like to communicate, but awful for those who do. We text all the time enough don't talk enough. My advice: rest your fingers!

A new way to engage and inspire

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:15:00 +0000

After seeing the movie Minority Report, it seems that the future might be even cooler than expected. Everything is executed via touches and gestures; it's not mind reading, but it's awfully close. HP is the closest in terms of using really futuristic graphics and visuals into their TV commercials; I wonder who will use this technology and ascend to the next level of visual stimulation. In a perfect world, IBM would transition from their STOP TALKING. START DOING message and bridge it solely to cool and efficient ways of doing. e.g. START DOING. [LIKE THIS or WE HAVE]

g-speak overview 1828121108 from john underkoffler on Vimeo.

What's left for Coors Light?

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 06:04:00 +0000

Is there anything left for Coors Light to do? They have the "freshness liner," the color temperature indicator, born on date, and now the vent. I think Coors Brewing Co. has a think tank that sits around and tries to find new ways to make the can cooler. It's scarily akin to Steve Jobs at MacWorld where he says "One more thing." It feels like Coors Light makes a new debut of their can every quarter. Their latest modification, "the vent" is clever for two reason. One, it allows Coors Light to brag about its new design and improved "drinkability," and two, the vent allows more beer to exit the can at a faster rate so more beer gets consumed. Luckily, the alcoholic beverage industry has created the word "drinkability" to mask the truth. If I were in the Coors Light think tank I know what my next suggestion would be. "Shotgun enabled cans!" The can would have another tab on the side of the can, so the consumer can shotgun the beer without ever stabbing a knife or pen into the side. All the Coors Light stunts seem so silly. I would never be more compelled to buy the beer. In fact, all the superfluous additions aggravate me and make me want to find the least expensive and innovative beer on the market. Someone should invent "Party Beer" and market it as such. Coors Light, Bud Light, Miller Light and all the other light beers except for Amstel should be in the "party section" of the supermarket. There is nothing about their taste that is interesting, and they serve no purpose other than low calorie intoxication. If you ever compare one of the aforementioned beers to something of substance like Dogfish Head the difference is incomprehensible. Therefore, Coors Light should exploit their party audience and make their next can a pinata. When you finish it, you can bash it with a plastic bat and little pieces of confetti appear. I like it.

Victoria's too sexy! What a paradox.

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 19:13:00 +0000

As the economy enters a recession and all things seem to be hitting the fan, we have to deal with another crisis..."Victoria Secret CEO Sharen Turney says the chain has become 'too sexy.'"

WHAT?! I never thought I'd hear the words "too sexy" and "Victoria's Secret" in the same sentence, but stranger things have happened. After the initial shock and seemingly paradoxical statement, I sat back and realized that it's true. I recall my tween days of mall shopping and seeing a clear mix of customers in Victoria's Secret. The typical 15-20 year-old, youthful 40 year-old and single 30 something, but now it seems that you need a lower back tattoo to enter. The mannequins used to have 90's era sexy underwear, and now they barely have enough fabric qualify as lingerie. No wonder they're losing their 40 something demographic. Women at that age no longer feel the need be skanky, they just want to look better than bland.

When an article of clothing has less material than a cocktail napkin, something went wrong. The store didn't get too sexy, it got too skanky and dirty. They followed the trends and unfortunately it led them into a corner. So when did this look become popular? A few years ago girls started wearing clothes that deliberately revealed their thong. Thongs became the only acceptable mainstream underwear. So how did this start? Who do we credit for being the trend setter of skank? I say Sisqó.

That's right, you heard me, Sisqó. He was the pioneer of thong thought. His song "The Thong Song" was an anthem for everybody of the Carson Daly TRL generation. He made it loud and clear, "Thongs are a man's dream. The only way to show a man that you are truly sexy is to wear a thong." I'm not going to argue his point, I just want to credit him with the explosion of mainstream thongs and sexy underwear.

It's funny that a brand is suffering from a sexy image. Who would have ever thought "sexy" would be a problem in a lingerie store? Most companies try to convince you their product will make you sexy and now Victoria's Secret has to deal with a whole new marketing problem...becoming un-sexy without losing its image altogether. This might be the greatest advertising dilemma ever. Victoria's Secret has been the guinea pig for all other brands that might walk a fine line between west village fantasy sex store and a legitimate clothing store. Maybe as a society we've finally reached the point where we've gone overboard. The income statement has spoken, and it says "make some less skanky lingerie so the 40 year-olds will feel comfortable in your store."

Next fall... "Body by Victor Victoria" The Julie Andrews Line.

I'm really diggin' the AVIS spots

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 05:40:00 +0000

It seems that AVIS rental cars kicked off one of the funniest campaigns in years immediately after their stock tumbled. Maybe the ads have been airing prior to the crash, but I only started to see them recently. Either way it's got to be tough to differentiate yourself among rental car companies. At the end of the day, who really cares about their rental car? For the average annual or semiannual vacationer I find it hard to believe that anyone cares about the car. I know from experience, price is my only concern.

However, AVIS decided to solely focus on their core competencies...business travelers. Their TV spots feature a boring, sad, long term parking lot with an ugly late model 90's car. The VO is from the car's POV and imitates a sad, lonely wife whose husband is out "traveling" but in reality, cheating on her. The copy is perfect and the visual works beautifully. It's funny, easy to get, and clearly makes you think AVIS is hot, young, and exciting. I cannot think of another way to get that point across without insulting the audience. Bravo AVIS, Bravo.

New DVD Formats are already obsolete

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 06:59:00 +0000

It doesn't matter that Blu Ray is becoming the new accepted DVD format because it too is already old news. With ability to download HD movies and TV shows without ever leaving the comfort of your home, Blu Ray will live a very short life. People love to make the argument that "we" material westerners always love tangible things, and that there will always be a desire to physically "own" the movie. This notion is false. Of course there will always be a group of people that need to touch their possessions, but for the rest of the material westerners, we'll put the movies on our peripherals. The peripherals are the desired material item, not the content.

There is nothing physically cool about a DVD. The content may be cool, but the actual device does not say anything about who you are other than your taste. A Blackberry however, speaks volumes. A Blackberry lets the people around you know that you think you are important. It tells people that you know how important business is, and you need to be in touch with the world at every second. Even swankier than a Blackberry is an iPhone. Oooooo! An iPhone really lets the world know who you are and what you truly value. For those who want an iPhone strictly because "it's that damn functional" have to catch all the flack for being similar to the superficial iPhone users. Just like sports cars, there are true enthusiasts and then there are truly insecure wealthy people.

DVD's are different. A bookshelf full of DVD's will never impress people the way it used to. Too many people have access to the content. It might be hard to imagine, but one day your neighbor with "all those movies" is going to look "old school" because you have all your content on a little pocket sized flash drive. Good bye Blu Ray, I am committed to never buying one single Blu Ray or HD DVD. The future is already obsolete.

WAP it. WAP it good.

noreply@blogger.com (Ian Wishingrad) — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 01:46:00 +0000

WAP is great. E-mail, Google, CNN, Facebook, ESPN or whatever you want right in your palm. As most "great" things go there is a catch. In this case, the catch is a mobile internet addiction. "Hi guys, my name is Ian, and I'm a WAPaholic." WAP is a drug, and to be quite honest I'm surprised the DEA hasn't created a new department to adddress it. As scary as it may sound, the first thing I did upon crossing the border from Canada to the US was check my e-mail. I was driving home, still had hours to go, but couldn't resist the temptation of checking my e-mail. I don't know what I was expecting to receive on a Sunday afternoon that could have been that pressing, but I love to check the mail. I hate that I need to check my mail all the time, but I do. I think it is an epidemic with my generation. We've learned from past experience that most e-mailers expect timely responses. Therefore, we've created a situation where it is "0kay" to check the mail whenever we wish. I know this pathetic dependence on technology will somehow rear its ugly head in my life at a later date, but what about the people that cannot afford WAP? This is where the rift exists. What is going to happen when people assume everyone has their e-mail all the time. Currently, I pay $45 per month to get an unlimited data plan from Verizon Wireless. Are these astronomical rates going to persist? Is bandwidth going to lose its value? Is a company like Google going to make WAP free as long as you allow yourself to be inundated with ads? I am so confused.

High speed mobile internet will one day be available to the masses. It has to. I've read about the future, I've seen movies about the future, I've even postulated my own future, and it always has people with WAP. So what is going to change to make WAP cheaper. In my mind, the only thing holding companies like Scanbuy, Slingbox and every company that uses the internet as a delivery method back is the lack of WAP proliferation. Will this expense just be something that people add to their list of essentials? I think that is the only way. I know that WAP will come down in price, but by how much?

Let's imagine it's 2020, everyone has a smartphone. Cellphones have been dead for 8 years. Everyone is logged on all the time. Exclusivity concerning the internet or WAP for that matter is dead like a Dodo. Everyone has access. If everyone is checking their e-mail all the time, and 85% of the country finds out about the newest celebrity overdose within 2o minutes are we all addicted to WAP? If everyone uses WAP are we all addicts? Were we addicted to radio and newspapers before TV? Were we addicted to landlines before cell phones? Yes and no. Yes because you can probably classify much of human behavior as "addictive," but no because unlike real drugs, there isn't physical repercussion when refraining from WAP. We're in a time of transition, where the "haves and the have-nots" are separated. As time marches on, we'll all be on an even playing field again, where WAP is as common as a car radio. I don't know how it's going to financially occur, but I know it will. I just know it.