It’s Not OK

In recent weeks, I’ve seen and received direct feedback from several folks that we all act like assholes and b&^ches online.

That’s true.

These same people say restraining tongue and keyboard to act with decency and civility is inauthentic. I don’t recall every being taught that if we have character flaws that it gives us a license to “walk around” online and take hostages in the name of authenticity.

What do I mean by that?

Knowingly hurting other people, and blowing off responsibility for our conduct by saying, “Too bad, it’s my nature.”

A forthcoming Columbia University and the University of Pittsburgh study shows that surfing on Facebook with close friends lowers inhibitions towards self control. The study says that with an inflated positive self caused by ego-stroking on Facebook we feel more inclined to take license.

So know we know the medium is toxic. Does that give us license to behave poorly?

Abusing License

You know what? Leaving a trail of human wreckage behind me, all because of an inflated sense of self online doesn’t cut the mustard.

I can’t live with that. It’s not OK.

And yeah, I am a jerk and mean and nasty at times. My snark cuts deeper than most, and these days I intentionally withhold it online because you can’t tell I’m kidding when I write it.

In fact, I increasing save it for self deprecation so as not to hurt someone in on or offline.

At 40, it’s clear my struggle to be less of a jerk will last a lifetime, but I hope to die a mellow old lovable man. Whether I just consistantly embarrass myself or grow, I won’t stop trying to improve.

The defense of brazen “authenticity” of people who “act like themselves” as the ultimate cop out. It’s easier to walk away from responsibility towards others than to embrace a harder path of change.

When I see this kind of behavior, I see someone who is unwilling or cannot face their inner demons. Unfortunately, most people will never look inward. Instead they opt to continue acting exactly like they always have, and forgo moving towards a better future or breaking the chains to future generations.

Worse, they seem bent on inflicting their suffering on others.

Let them… Without me.

Read More

What Is the Round, Anyway?

Win one of 10 free autographed copies of Marketing in the Round on Goodreads!

One of the most common questions Gini Dietrich and I got during our book tour last Spring was why did you call the book “in the Round?”

We needed to figure out a way to convey the of a convening of the marketing function. The collective meeting unites disparate departments and silos in and out of the marketing function to integrate multichannel strategies.

So we took a card out of the theatre world, and dubbed the meeting, “Marketing in the Round.”

In the theatre round, the cast performs but is surrounded by its stakeholders or audience. It’s actually quite a rewarding experience, and one that translates well to concerts, too.

Similarly, marketers are acting in the round on behalf of the company, both its internal and external stakeholders.

In a fully functioning round, various stakeholders join the round at times to voice their needs and to completely integrate communications. We discuss this a great deal in the book.

Another round metaphor can be drawn, specifically The Round Table of Arthurian Legend.

In Arthur’s Round Table, all of his knights met together as one group to discuss the problems of the realm. What was notable about the round (other than its legendary members) was that though there was a king, everyone had an equal seat at the table.

Similarly, all members of the marketing round meet together as one to address the sales and communications objectives of the company. Ideally, all disciplines and departments should have a say in the effort.

So that’s how Marketing in the Round was titled.

What do you think, we’re we too cute for school or on point?

Read More

Google Deserves More Credit

You know something, Google deserves more credit.

This is not a defense of Google+, rather the company’s overall approach and success online in recent years.

I felt this way when I learned the company had scrapped its facial recognition technology because the negative uses outweighed the good. It’s not an isolated incident.

Google changed its privacy earlier this year, uniting its many disparate policies across different products into one holistic company-wide statement. The company waged an extensive public relations and advertising effort to explain the new policy to the general public.

When was the last time Facebook did that? Never, to my knowledge. You just log in and find everything switched without any communication whatsoever.

Then there’s the success of Android, the only smartphone operating system to surpass Apple’s iOS in sales during the past few years.

Finally, the company’s new Penguin update for search has gone a long way to eliminate content farms successfully getting indexed in top results.

Future products look exciting, too. For example the Glass Project promises to make augmented reality via mobile phone connectivity a reality.


Yet if you ask social media experts they simply bag Google for +.

It’s true, Google+ is not Facebook. But I will say this: It’s mobile app is 80 times better than the nightmare Facebook offers.

Google+ also represents one of the most incredible integration projects ever, uniting many different web properties under one backbone.

Yes, Google+ has its benefits and deserves much of the criticism it has received.

If you ask me, though, Google deserves much more credit for everything it does online, especially compared to its competitors like Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft and Apple.

What do you think of Google?

Read More