09 February
0Comments

Who Won the Social Media Superbowl? [infographic]

How was the Superbowl this year? As a household without cable, keeping up with sports is not my forte. I’ve heard through the grape vine it wasn’t very entertaining or what one would consider a “good game” besides Beyonce’s ridiculously awesome half time show. Ya, I looked that up on youtube…

I believe this is the first Superbowl where football as a sport didn’t garner as much attention as the half-time performance, technical difficulties or brotherly rivalry. Is this a sign that the athletic aspect of sports are not as important as the entertainment aspect? I know ESPN has started putting microphones on outspoken players, is the game not enough?

But don’t get me wrong, I do enjoy a good football game. I’ve attended literally thousands of sporting events thanks to my dad working in the sports industry, but I truly believe the game is changing. Today’s graphic is about the social media impact of the teams, but if compared to the power outage or Beyonce I’d bet the athletic tweet count would pale in comparison.

super-bowl-infographic

Via DailyInfographic: http://dailyinfographic.com/

06 September
0Comments

Would You Hire This Person?

Brass balls

Imagine you are Taylor Grey Meyer and you have worked very hard on acquiring a future in the business of sports. You started at age 15 by volunteering at a minor league team. You’ve interned at a national league team. You’ve acquired a degree in sports commerce and you’re on your way to a law degree. You move to the city where you’d love to work and you send no fewer than 30 resumes in for various roles, eventually dropping into the “entry level” category, just in case. They reject you there, too.

And then you get a letter asking you if you want to PAY for a camp that will teach you more about the sports business from the very same organization.

That’s exactly what happened.

The Article Above Is Required Reading Before We Talk Further

If you skipped over that link, you should read it and then come back. It’s okay. I’ll wait.

What’s interesting to me is that most people’s reactions were in the vein of “I wouldn’t hire her” and “Oh, she just burned all her bridges.” I’m stuck. Because I understand how it’s not professional to ask prospective employers to suck one’s dick (doubly interesting because Taylor’s a female), but I also know that she must be so frustrated, and that by pointing out all her qualifications, it’s even more obvious that she’d had enough.

To me, she’s got a lot of guts and character and she’s clearly passionate. She just found the end of her rope is all. But that’s the real question, isn’t it?

Would You Hire This Person?

Most people disqualified her because she lost her cool. Others disqualified her because she cursed. Me? I think her only sin is that she kept trying to send resumes instead of looking for another way to land the role she sought. To me, the problem isn’t that she’s ballsy, not that she swore, but that she wasn’t inventive enough to try something other than mailing pieces of paper and/or pixels to a company that was ignoring her.

Have you tried everything to get where you want to go? The answer is almost always no. We have such creative brains, and yet, we forget to use them when we get stuck in the Matrix of what is “typical.”

I’m not counting Taylor Grey Meyer out, but I’m definitely saying she is invited to get a lot more creative with her attempts to find a sports organization worthy of her qualifications and talents.

What say you?

Chris Brogan is an eleven year veteran of social media using both web and mobile technologies to build digital relationships for businesses, organizations, and individuals.

10 August
0Comments

Awesome Discontinued Olympic Events

Awesome Discontinued Olympic Events

Tug of War? Club Swinging? Live Pigeon Shooting. What a fantastic list!

image

Here’s a version from the Telegraph describing “Single Stick”€ involved two man standing still, facing one another, and attempting to draw blood from the other’s head with a stick.

Wow. How great is that? They should bring that back.

image

Via FastCoDesign: http://www.fastcodesign.com/

24 July
0Comments

Why Social Media Will Reshape the 2012 Olympics

The 2012 Olympics in London are being touted by some as the world’s “first social Games.” While some question just how social they’ll actually be, there’s no doubt that networks such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube will play an unprecedented role in how information is disseminated from London, and how the global sports conversation is driven during July and August.

Why the big shift? It’s simple: Four years is an eternity in Internet time and since the last Summer Olympics in 2008, social media has exploded.

Web use in general has grown rapidly, too. In 2008, there were about 1.5 billion Internet users globally, according to the International Telecommunications Union, making up about 23% of the world’s total population. By this summer’s games, that number will have swelled to about 2.3 billion users making up about a third of the world’s total population.

Summer Olympics feature some of the most popular international sports — including soccer, basketball, swimming, and track and field — so that’s sure to fuel the global buzz as well. For more context on just how and why social media will reshape this year’s Olympics in relation to 2008, we thought it’d be interesting to take a quick look at a few of the world’s most popular networks and how they compare then and now.

Facebook

2008: A tweet in August of 2008 from then-Facebook executive and eventual Path co-founder Dave Morin gleefully celebrated Facebook breaking the 100 million-user threshold. 2008 was also marked by reports around the web of Facebook — gasp! — passing MySpace in popularity. The social network debuted its now omnipresent chat feature that year as well.

Today: Facebook claims more than 900 million users, is fast becoming a portal to the web at large for many and is a publicly traded company. Its founder Mark Zuckerberg is a global celebrity.

Twitter

2008: 2008 saw explosive growth for Twitter, and it still finished the year with about 6 million registered users who sent about 300,000 tweets per day. The social network and its users were still very much finding their way, as evidenced by this official blog post explaining @replies. In 2009, Minnesota Timberwolves forward Kevin Love would tweet that the team’s coach had been let go, breaking the story and causing some in the sports world to speculate that maybe, just maybe, the service could change how news was delivered and consumed.

Today: Twitter currently claims more than 500 million users who collectively send some 400 million tweets each and every day. Sports news regularly breaks on the network, it’s become a prime marketing channel for athletes and much of the London 2012 conversation among media and fans is sure to take place there.

YouTube

2008: By fall of 2008, YouTube users were uploading 10 hours of video to the site per minute. The site had emerged as the go-to destination for web video and had been acquired by Google two years prior. It also launched its mobile site, pre-roll ads and 720p HD option in 2008. But that success was nothing compared to what the site would look like four years later.

Today: Iconic Olympic moments are sure to go viral and become immortalized on YouTube seemingly as they happen this summer, and it’s easy to see why. The company says it receives over 800 million unique visits per month. Those visitors watch more than 3 billion hours of video per month and upload 72 hours of new video content per minute. Five hundred years’ worth of YouTube video are watched on Facebook every day and more than 700 YouTube videos get shared on Twitter each minute.

What It All Means

Just looking at the the three most ubiquitous social networks reveals a sporting scene and world at large that have been transformed by social media since the last Summer Olympics. And that doesn’t take into account services like Pinterest, Foursquare and Google+ — none of which even existed in 2008. This summer, expect news to break, social sharing records to fall and moments to live on as never possible before thanks to social media. And to think — this will all pale in comparison to what 2016 has in store.

How will you use social media during the 2012 Olympics? Share with us in the comments.

Thumbnail image via iStockphoto, cmannphoto

Via Mashable: http://www.mashable.com

22 May
0Comments

Music, Film, TV: How social media changed the entertainment experience

Social media is more than a digital water cooler for TV and movies. The global conversation that takes place around events and the experiences people share based on what they watch teaches us about consumer preferences. More importantly, their activity influences behavior. Behavior counts for everything. Studying it is just the beginning of course. In order to understand and eventually steer behavior, we must translate activity into insights and in turn, translate insights into actionable strategies and programs.

The Hollywood Reporter recently published an exclusive poll about social media led by market research firm Penn Schoen Berland. As the report opens, THR notes, “There’s a sea change afoot in how Americans discover and consume entertainment.”

According to the study, 88% of respondents view social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook as a new form of entertainment.

Hours Spent Each Week Doing Online Activities

Social networking and listening to music top the activities for Generation-C and each is greater than the time spent watching full-length movies or television shows on a weekly basis.

- 8 Hours: Visiting social networking sites.
- 8 Hours: Listening to music
- 7 Hours: Watching full-length television shows.
- 4 Hours: Watching full-length movies.
- 4 Hours: Watching video clips (e.g. YouTube)
- 4 Hours: Instant messaging

How Social Networking Impacts Entertainment Choices

The report found that 79% of connected television viewers visit Facebook while watching TV.

Pollster Jon Penn notes, “Social media is the connective tissue that enables consumers to multitask during their entertainment experiences by connecting with others and sharing their opinions.”

Additionally, 83% surf the web while viewing TV and 41% tweet about the show they’re watching.

When we look at the psychology of engagement, this next stat becomes a bit more revealing. Of those who post about TV shows, 76% do so live and 51% do so to feel connected to others who might also be watching.

Comedies, Reality TV Put Social in Social Media

Social networking is in its own right a reality show made for the web. It is its own form of entertainment. And, as the study found, an overwhelming majority of people agree. When we look at the types of programs viewers are most likely to post about while watching TV, Comedy, Reality TV, Sports and News take the top four spots.

Types of shows people are most likely to post about while watching TV:
56%: Comedy
46%: Reality TV
38%: Sports
26%: Cable News

Social Media on the Silver Screen

Digital Influence is often misunderstood, but it is potent. Influence is causing effect or changing behavior. Here, we can see that those who Tweet about movies actually influence the behavior of those who follow them.

One out of three connected consumers saw a movie in a theater because of something they read on a social network.

The report found that horror and other younger-skewing film genres benefit most from social networking. For example, more than 6% of respondents saw Paranormal Activity 3 because of social networking activity. One can assume based on psychological studies, that this form of social commerce is driven by either #FOMO (fear of missing out) or social proof.

Social Networking in Theaters…Really?

Prior to watching any movie in theaters nowadays, viewers must sit through a short spot that reminds them not to use their phones during the theater. Aside from the ringing adding unnecessary distractions to other theatergoers, the bright white screen is also disruptive as it tends to light up an otherwise dark room.

However, social networking is not limited to at-home movie watching. 55% of moviegoers have texted during a movie. Film moguls and theater owners should take note: The poll also found that an overwhelming majority of 18-to-34-year-olds believe using social networks such as Facebook and Twitter while watching a movie in a theater would actually add to their experience. Nearly half would be interested in going to theaters that allowed texting and web surfing.

Penn added, “Millennials want their public moviegoing experience to replicate their own private media experiences.”

The same can’t be said for all consumers though as 75% of respondents said that using a mobile phone would take away from the experience.

Additionally 24% and 21% have posted about what they’re watching in theaters on Facebook and Twitter respectively.

Social Media Multitasking ≠ Distraction

Gen-C is often falsely diagnosed with a thin attention span. Yet in reality, Gen-C focuses on all that’s important to them many times at the same time. They’re just wired differently and rather than challenge it or try to debunk its value, our energy should instead focus on understanding how multitasking adds to the experience.

When asked what other activities are performed while social networking, watching programs on TV was by far the most popular at 66% followed by watching movies on TV at 50%. Interestingly, 11% stated that they watch a movie in a theater while networking.

So, what are viewers saying while multitasking between networking and watching TV. It’s a bit of give and take as 67% will listen to or read what others have to say and 33% will most likely express their own opinions or thoughts.

Social Media Impact on TV Viewing Choices

How can social media drive tune-in? That’s often one of the top questions on the mind of TV marketers. As of now, serendipity certainly plays a role in contributing to tune-in. Three out of 10 people watched a TV show because of something they read or saw on a social network.

Social Media Spawns a New Genre of Critics

In the age of social media, viewers have become participants in real-time experiences. And many, are also becoming critics simply what they say and share online. Social network activity certainly influences behavior, but to what extent requires greater study.

The study found that 72% of respondents post about movies on social networks after watching a film. We can assume that those expressions are rooted in opinion and we can also hypothesis that these shared opinions in some way affect the impression of those who see them. At the same time, 20% post before and 8% post during a viewing.

This Just In…

News no longer breaks, it Tweets. Those who run social activity streams all day will tell you that they learn about news on Twitter first which then drives them to a online or broadcast news source to learn more. But, 31% and 28% of respondents reported that their main source for breaking news is cable news stations news web sites respectively.

I wonder about that data point however as it’s not clear if it is the primary source or the main source. The fact that the study found that social networks make up 19% of their breaking news source provides some clarity, but I still question the source of the flashpoint.

Social Media is Music to My Ears

It’s not just TV shows or movies that benefit from social media. All forms of entertainment lend to peer-to-peer behavioral influence. THR found that musicians also benefit from social media with 70% of respondents listening to music by an artist based on what a friend posted on a social networking site.

For those who saw or read about my interview with Billy Corgan of The Smashing Pumpkins at SXSW, certainly heard how he believes fans must step up their support for the artists that they love. And, sharing what you’re listening to is certainly one way to contribute, whether it’s through frictionless sharing apps such as Spotify or stated support by Tweeting, Facebooking or blogging support.

Social Media Tests Positive for Influence

Based on the work of Robert Cialdini, I analyzed six universal heuristics and the role they play in consumer decision making in social commerce. Referred to as “thinslicing,” consumers tend to ignore most information available and instead ‘slice off’ a few relevant information or behavioral cues that are often social to make intuitive decisions.

The THR study surfaced that more than half of respondents (56%) believe that social networks play an important role in making entertainment-related decisions. Across every genre of entertainment, respondents felt that positive posts held greater influence over their decisions than those that are negative.

Specifically, 82% are influenced in the music they listen to; 76% in the TV shows they watch; 75% in the movies they choose to see; and 74% in the video games they play.

Facebook vs. Twitter

I often refer to Twitter, Facebook and activity stream apps as new attention dashboards. THR asked respondents which networks they used and how. The answers help in how we better understand what’s of interest to consumers.

Of all respondents, 98% are Facbook and 56% are Twitter members. In terms of daily visits, 9 out of 10 visit Facebook and 1 of 2 visit Twitter every day.

When asked about who and what they follow, participants shared the following…

Companies/Brands:
Facebook = 49%
Twitter = 37%

TV Shows:
Facebook = 49%
Twitter = 30%

Movies
Facebook = 43%
Twitter = 25%

Actors/Actresses
Facebook = 32%
Twitter = 41%

Reality TV Stars
Facebook = 16%
Twitter = 23%

Journalists/Reports
Facebook = 9%
Twitter = 15%

I find it interesting that consumers connect more with brands, movies, or shows on Facebook whereas Twitter is the preferred choice for connecting with people. Marketers should take note in how people form fandoms and communities, where and how.

The State of Movie Marketing

Considering the behavior of Gen-C as well as all other consumers, marketers can’t rule out any form of promotion or engagement without understanding the balance and how each contribute to consumerism.

The study found that even through social networking is playing a significant role in movie watching and shared experiences, traditional marketing is still king in how consumers make moviegoing decisions. Trailers and previews are the biggest influence for movie choices at 40%, which can include a variety of sources for where that trailer is viewed (theater, TV, website, Youtube, etc.) TV ads still play a large role in decision making at 20%. Real world word of mouth is also a important source of the selection process at 18%. Only 9% of respondents said that comments or reviews on social networks influenced decisions.

You are Now the Architect of a Multi-Screen Experience

Processing this data is one thing. Interpreting its impact on your strategy for programming, marketing, and engagement is up to you. What’s clear is that what we think about social media, entertainment, and influence and how consumers are behaving can only teach us about how to be more engaging, entertaining, and how to create and steer experiences that matter to consumers and producers. So what’s your second and third screen experience? Have you defined it? If not, this is the time to develop an engaging multi-screen experience because it’s already happening with or without your design.

Image Credit: ShutterstockVia Brian Solis: http://www.briansolis.com

07 May
0Comments

Upgrade Your Engine for 99 Cents

Photo: Damon Lavrinc/Wired

When the 2012 BMW M5 was launched, there was a communal chuckle from the the gearhead cognoscenti after BMW revealed it piped artificial engine noise into the cabin to maintain the sports sedan’s visceral experience. It’s an aural cheat, but a good one executed in fastidious German fashion. Unfortunately, everyone can’t afford a twin-turbocharged bahn-stormer, and if your aging Accord has more wheeze than roar, 2XL Games has a solution: the XLR8 app for iOS and Android.

Utilizing your smartphone’s built-in accelerometer and GPS, the XLR8 app gives you the burbling engine and exhaust noise of a big-bore V8, without the constant maintenance and dismal fuel economy. Even better, the audio gets plumbed into your car stereo through Bluetooth, your headphone jack or – in the case of iOS – via the 30-pin connector fitted to iPod-ready vehicles.

The concept is brilliantly silly, as long as you don’t take it too seriously.

We tested it with the “Classic V8 Muscle Car” engine tone included in the app, and after a quick and painless calibration, we were chugging along to the dulcet tones of a snorting eight-pot.

Syncing the sounds with our own acceleration and braking proved a bit difficult at first, as the accelerometer responds better to heavy throttle and brake inputs, and not putting around town at a constant speed. But flying up an on-ramp and braking heavily into a corner, the XLR8 app matched our car’s movements surprisingly well, even simulating the chirp of tires when we mashed the gas out of a corner.

Playing with the sliders in the Options menu allows you to tweak shift points, gear ratios and brake pressure, along with “drift” and “burnout” tones. And if you’re more of a supercar fan, you can purchase Ferrari and Lamborghini engine noises in the app for $2.99 a pop (automaker licensing departments on line one), or get the NASCAR engine, Ford GT40 and both Italian exotics for $4.99. All of them sound true to their inspiration – no surprise since each is pulled from recordings of actual cars 2XL uses in their racing games.

Considering all the cr-apps in the world, XLR8 stands surprisingly outside the annals of bad ideas. And if it’s good enough for BMW, it’s good enough for your dilapidated commuter.

Via Wired Autopia: http://www.wired.com/autopia/

02 April
0Comments

Who (Or What’s) Best At Predicting March Madness Winners?

When it comes to predicting March Madness winners, who knows best: experts, algorithms, or the crowd?

 

An estimated 45% of Americans will fill out an NCAA tournament bracket this year. That’s more than the number of people who voted in the 2010 midterm elections. And until the clock strikes 12:15 p.m. on March 15, and actual balls start being thrown at actual baskets, each and every one of us can pretend to be the smartest guy or gal in the room when it comes to making March Madness predictions.

But who (or what) really knows best? Last month, we looked at algorithmic, social, and expert approaches to predicting Oscar winners and determined that a combination of expert opinion and algorithmic analysis was the most successful tactic. Now, on the eve of America’s favorite predictive orgy, March Madness, we ask the question again: Are the best predictors robots, writers, or the crowd at-large?

Surely, the people who are paid to watch college basketball for a living know what they’re doing, right? But while all but one of CBS Sports’ expert analysts expects Kentucky to win it all, the predictions vary wildly beyond the championship game. Furthermore, the experts may be more likely to choose upsets because, hey, they’re paid to know something the rest of the world doesn’t. And what better way to prove that than to throw outlandish upsets at the wall and see what sticks? The trouble is, while upsets are bound to happen, they’re usually not the upsets we predict. According to a study conducted by Indiana University (the 4th seed in the South region, by the way), you’ll have an equal or better success rate by trusting the Selection Committee’s seeding and picking zero upsets, regardless of your sports expertise. But since that’s no fun, let’s look at a couple other approaches.

A second option is to put your trust in the wisdom of the crowd. The bloggers at Hoopism have compiled data from the betting information service Sports Insights to display the percentage of real bets placed for or against each team. But since the data is based on actual wagers, the site only contains predictions for early games in which the teams are already decided.

That leaves us with the algorithmic approach, and few have seen more computer-based predictive models than Danny Tarlow and Lee-Ming Zen. Like many, Tarlow and Zen run an annual NCAA tournament pool. But what makes theirs unique is that each entry must be compiled by a machine with no consideration for human judgment.

“Three years ago, I had two things on my mind,” said Tarlow, a PhD student in Computer Science at the University of Toronto. “First, I was working on building a recommendation system similar to the ones used in the Netflix challenge. Second, I hadn’t paid attention to college basketball that year, but I needed to fill out my bracket for a pool with some friends.  At some point, it struck me that I could use the exact same recommendation algorithm I had been coding up to make my bracket predictions.”

Tarlow went on to explain how the computers fared against their human counterparts in last year’s competition. “We included three human-ish baselines: always picking the higher seed, the bracket predicted by Nate Silver, and Lee’s personal bracket.  Against that field, the machines won.” (For the uninitiated, the New York Times’ Nate Silver creates a bracket each year combining human- and computer-based systems.)

Tarlow and Zen both agree that while the success rate of each algorithmic approach can vary greatly, the computers are getting better every year. “The approaches and setups definitely become more sophisticated,” said Zen. “But even then, we’re only scratching at the surface.”

Tarlow agreed that they still have a long way to go. “I’ll just say that I haven’t taken my bank account and headed off for Vegas yet,” he said.

You don’t need to create your own algorithm to get a little robotic assistance for your bracket. There are plenty of free computer-based predictive models out there, from numberFire to Power Rank (which displays its predictions in an attractive visualization). But if there’s one thing most of the predictors agree with, human or otherwise, it’s that the smart money is on No. 1 overall seed Kentucky to take home the championship trophy. Then again, ESPN is quick to point out that the No. 1 overall seed has only won once since the committee started handing out that distinction eight years ago.

All of this reveals what we already secretly knew, even if our pre-tournament egos try to tell us otherwise: There’s no foolproof method to sports prediction, no matter how knowledgable the human, or how advanced the algorithm. So America, stop agonizing over your bracket and get back to work.

Image: Flickr user Erik Charlton

Via Fast Company: http://www.fastcompany.com

03 March
0Comments

How NASCAR Took Over Twitter

Greg Biffle, Dale Earnahdrt Jr, Landon Cassill and Joey Logano (from left) wait for Brad Keselowski as they walk down the track toward the fire that brought the NASCAR Daytona 500 to a halt. Photo: Bill Friel/Associated Press

By Matt Hardigree, Jalopnik

America’s wonkiest social media platform, Twitter, and its (supposedly) most backward sport, NASCAR, exploded in a massive fireball fueled by jet fuel, secret phones and good timing last night during the Daytona 500. It’s the story of how one driver picked up 100,000 followers in two hours and how the sport of good ol’ boys may be forever changed.

To the uninformed, NASCAR may seem like the last place a technology like Twitter — created by and for and the kind of hip techies who know which breakfast taco places have free wifi during SXSW — might thrive. To these people, NASCAR is just a bunch of guys driving in a circle.

 

But NASCAR, like baseball, grows more interesting with context. It’s an epic soap opera, and fans thrive on information. Who’s pitting? How’s their car doing? What’s the track condition? Such things are the currency of NASCAR fans on race day. Although they may not be among the most tech-savvy fans, they may be the most voracious consumers of info outside the Fantasy Baseball crowd. Just look at their apps.

Most drivers have Twitter accounts, and savvy fans flock to knowledgeable reporters like SBNation’s Jeff Gluck and AP reporter Jenna Fryer, both of whom have more than 20K followers. (How many AP reporters can say that?) Fox Sports’ NASCAR anchor Mike Joy has more than 16,000 followers. There’s an unofficial NASCAR weatherman and a page for the unlucky Jet Drier that (usually) keeps the track dry.

So fans clearly use Twitter a lot. But something special happened last night that merged the technology to the sport in ways almost certain to be permanent.

Well, as permanent as anything can be when it comes to technology.

 

Emergency workers battle a fire after Juan Pablo Montoya’s car hit a jet drier truck during the NASCAR Daytona 500. Photo: Bill Friel/Associated Press

The Daytona 500 is the first race of the year, which makes it a Very Big Deal. But it also was Danica Patrick’s debut in NASCAR’s top series, which also is a big deal.

The race was slated for Sunday, but an an untimely rain delay pushed it Monday night. Fox, seeing a potential bonanza, preempted an episode of House no one cared about and an episode of Alcatraz no one would watch to show the race in prime time.

This expanded the audience to include a lot of people who wouldn’t have otherwise watched the race. They weren’t disappointed. The first crash came just two laps in when Patrick got mixed up in a pile-up.

It was the first of ten cautions, none of which could match the (literally) explosive power of Juan Pablo Montoya crashing into a jet drier clearing the track of debris. The impact, which happened under caution, ignited 200 gallons of jet fuel, creating a giant fireball and a river of flame. It brought the race to a halt.

Unplanned TV often is the best TV. Montoya walked away from his mangled car, no one was seriously injured and the video made for riveting television. Explosions are inherently sexy and tap a deep part of our subconscious. Just ask Michael Bay. Preliminary reports show the race’s ratings climbed from 7.8 to 8.8 after the accident, possibly giving Fox its highest-rated Monday night since the World Series.

And there we were, all of us watching men fight a river of fire when something even weirder happened: Popular NASCAR driver Brad Keselowski pulled a phone from his pocket, snapped a pic from inside his car and posted it to Twitter.

Most people never suspected a NASCAR driver circling a track at 200 mph might have a phone in his pocket. So of course it set off a Twitter storm, immediately giving us direct access to the thoughts of a driver even as commentators were prattling on about the weirdest thing they’d ever seen in racing. It was far more immediate, and intimate, than listening to a driver’s radio.

A sampling:

As the wait went on:

It was, as far as I can tell, unprecedented in modern racing. Keselowski was funny, charming, informative and interactive. In other words, he was a perfect spokesman for everything that’s great about Twitter.

And for those who wonder, NASCAR has no problem with Keselowski’s tweets:

Because it’s the NASCAR Sprint Cup, there’s already a push from Fox to get people to follower commentators, reporters and everyone else on Twitter. Last night it went into overdrive. The fire became less important as everyone was talking about Twitter. Keselowski picked up 100,000 followers while tweeting from the track. He was up to 211,265 by mid-day today.

I’ve asked Twitter for the full numbers, but I suspect we’ll find those new followers weren’t simply NASCAR fans who weren’t already following Keselowski — already one of the most popular drivers on Twitter. I think we’ll find two groups added to Keselowski’s impressive number:

The first is NASCAR fans joining Twitter to find out what was going on and get in on a social media platform they’ve only now come to understand the significance of.

The second is casual racing fans or non-fans who, watching the strange spectacle unfold, started following Keselowski just to get in on the excitement. That’s why I started following him.

Of course, the fire brought the race to a halt, and eventually drivers started getting out of their cars. Then they started talking. And what did they talk about?

Twitter.

Dave Blaney, who found himself in first place as the bizarre scene unfolded on the track, became a trending topic. Blaney, who had never won a race despite 397 race starts, was being asked whether he was on Twitter, not what he thought about being one thunderstorm away from winning one of the world’s biggest races.

And the memes! Oh the memes. So many memes. The guys at @SpeedSportLife — who typically tweet the entire 24 Hours of Le Mans but rarely a three-hour NASCAR race — were madly tweeting images by our own commenters before we even noticed.

If you were watching the race but you weren’t on Twitter, you were missing the latest info, best jokes and most insightful views of one of the wildest races ever. The race eventually restarted, Keselowski put his phone back in his pocket and a guy no one knows (Blaney) lost the race to Matt Kenseth, a guy who’d won it before.

Who won ultimately doesn’t matter. The outcome was more than a victory for one driver or one team. It was a victory for NASCAR. The 2012 Daytona 500 was the merging of two cultures, a union that, in retrospect, was inevitable.

NASCAR relies on short, timely bursts of information, which is exactly what Twitter does best. The rest of us just figured it out.

 

Via Wired Autopia: http://www.wired.com/autopia/

20 January
0Comments

Disruptive Innovation, Dog-Food Edition

Believe it or not, at one point we actually fed our pets real food. That was, until people-food companies realized they could maximize their resources by mashing together all of their scrap meat, leftover grains, eggshells, and bones, injecting some vitamins, and cooking it up into “kibble.”

Lucy Postins, founder of the human-grade whole-food pet food company, The Honest Kitchen, set out to change all of that, nearly a decade ago. Her line of dehydrated pet food is vibrant with colors from real, whole foods–green spinach, orange carrots, yellow bananas, red cranberries–and packed with protein from healthy and ethically raised animals, such as chicken, turkey, beef, and haddock. Additionally, she has a set of morals that drive everything she does: The Honest Kitchen won’t sell to any pet store that sells puppies, in an effort to fight against puppy mills, and she’s said no thanks to some of the big-box retailers as well in an effort to support independents.

What she didn’t realize in those early days as she sat cooking up homemade dog food in her Southern California kitchen, was that she was about to shake the pet food industry to its core, creating a disruptive ripple effect. I recently sat down with her to learn more about how she puts principles over profits. Here’s what she had to say.

In your mind, what is disruptive innovation, and are you using it to transform the pet food industry?

I think of disruptive innovation as creating something that consumers didn’t realize they needed; it’s developing a product that changes the status quo and refreshes the set of options consumers have, with something new that makes the old options (which they previously thought were fine) suddenly seem dull or flawed.

What advice would you give to other entrepreneurs who are striving to change an industry?

I think one of the main tasks for the innovator is often the communication. Since you’re creating a product that meets a new need, there’s work involved in explaining exactly what you’ve created and how it’s better than what people are in the habit of using. The great thing with this task, of course, is that you’re telling a story that’s true and meaningful, as opposed to coming up with gimmicky messaging to try and differentiate yourself. With our products, once we put them to market, we found consumers were choosing to use them for a really wide array of reasons, so it’s been challenging to articulate our messaging in a way that’s concise but sufficiently explanatory, to every type of consumer who’s interested in the food.

The thing that’s helped us a lot in this is the fact that we are our own consumer. We’re a company of animal lovers, making products we believe in that are good enough for our own pets to eat. That means we can connect with our customers at a deep level and have an empathetic way to tell our story.

On a practical level, besides staying true to your mission and values, I think listening to your gut is one of the most important things you can do as an entrepreneur. I’m a pretty intuitive person (and quite stubborn, too) and I think if you really believe in an idea or know in your heart that something’s going to work, you should just go for it and not waste loads of time analyzing the numbers. It’s equally important to have the freedom to fail and to know when to stop something if it isn’t working out; I can think of a couple of occasions where I’ve failed to follow through on what my instinct has told me, particularly when it comes to employees not working out, and not severing ties quickly enough.

What has been the hardest part of going up against major brands with multi-million-dollar budgets in pursuit of what you believe is right?

It sounds strange to say, but when I look back I don’t feel we have really struggled hugely. From the outset, we didn’t have a major plan for aggressive growth; The Honest Kitchen has grown in an organic way and charted its own course on many levels so we’ve evolved without the pressure to be a certain size at a certain time. That means we have been able to stay true to our roots and allowed our values to thrive. In turn, that’s further fueled our growth because it’s deepened our connections with our customers who then feel inspired enough to tell others.

With that all said, we have of course had our challenges over the years and probably the most prominent for me have been the regulatory challenges from FDA and various state departments of agriculture, challenging our claims that our pet foods are human grade. Dealing with government agencies is exhausting at the best of times and it really took huge time and energy to prove the legitimacy and truthfulness of our human grade claim to the FDA, but we ultimately prevailed and received a “Statement of No Objection” from them. We also ended up in a legal battle with the State of Ohio, who also disputed the claim and refused to issue us a feed license until we took them to court and the judge ruled in our favor, based on our right to truthful commercial free speech.

What makes your company different from every other pet food company trying to make a difference?

Our human-grade status is a major differentiator. Our products are made in a human food facility on the exact same equipment used to produce various foods people eat. That really strikes a chord with consumers and sets us apart from lower quality, feed-grade manufacturers.

We’re extremely selective when it comes to our suppliers, too. We’ve worked with many of the same producers since we began in 2002 and insist that all suppliers sign an annual “Vendor Pledge” to provide assurance of the quality and integrity of the ingredients we buy. We won’t use GMO or irradiated ingredients, and don’t accept any ingredients from China.

We also don’t allow our products to be sold in stores that sell puppies; I’m strongly opposed to the puppy mill trade and believe that a responsible breeder’s animals would never end up in a shop (or a shelter).

The other thing that makes us different is literally who we are as a team of people. It’s amazing how many pet food companies are owned by huge conglomerates and driven solely by the bottom line, and/or run by old men in gray suits who don’t even own a dog, let alone kick their spouse off the couch so the dog can have a comfy seat! My staff and I really put the animals first–pets before profits–on every level.

How do you believe your brand has the power to transform your section of the world? 

We, along with a handful of other great companies who are producing top quality pet products, see ourselves as part of a movement of “indie” producers working together to raise the bar within our industry. The ultimate goal among us is to make people aware of the link between pet food and pet health, and instigate an upgrade from the type of pellets most people feed, to fresher, healthier alternatives like ours. I think The Honest Kitchen was a pioneer within our specific category (dehydrated, human grade whole foods), but we’re part of a bigger movement all working together for the common good.

How do you stay focused during major challenges or when you feel like you’ve hit a wall?

Although it’s a cliché, I think the work-life balance is extremely important, especially given that my husband Charlie also works here and that we have a young family. We feel it’s important to have a good dividing line between work and home and to be as focused as possible in each area, when we’re there.

I make it a priority to hike every morning with my dogs before work, to clear my head and get my “list”organized for the day ahead. I also rely a lot on a “to do” list each day at my desk. Checking off things as you complete them is so rewarding, especially in a role where you have a very diverse set of responsibilities and loads of daily interruptions.

If I do hit a wall, I think it’s important to stop rather than try to struggle on. A quick snuggle with the office dogs (we have 10 here most days, including my two Rhodesian ridgebacks and a blind pug), taking them for a walk–or, being British, stopping to make a cup of tea–can really help to reboot the day.

What is the most valuable thing someone else told you that you’ve applied to your business?

Many years ago, I had cause to email Gary Erickson, the founder of Clif Bar & Co. I was writing to let him know how much I enjoyed his book, Raising the Bar, and offering to send some food for the dogs at their office. Gary emailed back with “….Your story is inspiring and confirming. I pray you continue to grow without losing ‘control.’ Don’t give up equity, if so to the right people.” Those words stuck with me during our three year search for the right minority investors at The Honest Kitchen and ultimately, in a strange twist, the stars aligned and Gary’s own investment firm, White Road, was one of two we took growth capital from.

Another great piece of advice from one of our shareholders was to create a program that leveraged and rewarded our most passionate customers. Word of mouth has always been fundamental to our growth and formalizing how it worked to empower customers to be our spokespeople was a really smart piece of advice. That has ultimately become our “Honest Allies” program, which will further evolve into Honest Legends this year.

Why do you think your type of disruptive innovation will work? And why now?

I think it’s working because the products create a real, tangible difference in the health of pets. Improved digestion, shinier coats, better skin, and reduced ear infections are just a few of the improvements people see in their pets. It’s a natural talking point at the dog park, vet’s office, or even in the line at the grocery stores. Our products do speak for themselves, there’s a story attached and our customers are so connected that they’re only too willing to share it.

What values do you operate from, and why are they important?

I think “pets before profits” is the most important value that sits at the core of our daily decision-making; it means thinking about what’s right for the animal who is going to eat the food, often at the expense of the bottom line. Switching to 100% free range, antibiotic-free, and humanely raised chicken in our food made no sense from a fiscal standpoint, but has ultimately been good for business because it’s healthier for the pets who eat it–as well as having a positive impact on the planet and on animal welfare as a whole.

Some of our other values are:

  • Act intuitively. Go with your gut and do what we believe to be right even if it doesn’t make sense to others.
  • Customers guide us, not competitors. We’re 100% focused on what our customers want and expect and really try not to pay any attention to what others in our industry are doing (unless it’s something we’re collaborating with them on).
  • Only incredible things will distract us. Having a very involved customer base means we get lots of suggestions and ideas thrown our way.
  • Walk the talk. I think it’s essential to stay true to your values and do what you say. Our company name is our way of keeping ourselves transparent, open and honest in the way we operate.
  • Respect the Earth and give back. We’ve always given a portion of our profits to charity, and based decisions on what’s right for the environment–reducing plastics, utilizing recycled and compostable, SFI-certified packaging, and upgrading to certified organic ingredients when we can. Earlier this year the USDA approved the production of genetically modified alfalfa, and we immediately made the switch to using organic alfalfa in our products (absorbing the costs internally) to ensure our finished products remain GMO free.

If you could do one other disruptive thing in the world what would it be and why?

I’d love to be able to close the gap between the animal welfare movement, and those groups who are perceived as “animal rights activists” by some people who are involved in animals as a living. There are such extreme and opposing views about what’s right and wrong, on everything from breeding to showing and other sports. There are insufficient punishments for those who do wrong by animals, and too much misunderstanding about the motives of those who are trying to protect the right of animals. Many issues are very polarizing and I’d love to be able to wave a magic wand to bring some common sense to some of the issues, make some new laws (and punishments) and find some middle ground.

For more leadership coverage, follow us on Twitter and LinkedIn.

Shawn Parr is the The Guvner & CEO of Bulldog Drummond, an innovation and design consultancy headquartered in San Diego whose clients and partners have included Starbucks, Diageo, Jack in the Box, Adidas, MTV, Nestle, Pinkberry, American Eagle Outfitters, IDEO, Virgin, Disney, Nike, Mattel, Heineken, Annie’s Homegrown, The Michael J Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, CleanWell, The Honest Kitchen and World Vision. Follow the conversation at @BULLDOGDRUMMOND.

Via Fast Company: http://www.fastcompany.com

19 January
0Comments

Generation Flux: Pete Cashmore

On the eve of Thanksgiving, Pete Cashmore is neither basting a turkey nor preparing for football.
“It’s not my holiday,” the Scotsman remarks. Instead he’s in Vancouver, preparing for a
long weekend of R&R. Which the 26-year-old has certainly earned. Mashable, the tech-and-social site
that he launched with a blog as a 19-year-old, now attracts more than 20 million unique users a
month. “We’re a news site for the digital generation,” he says. “It’s our responsibility to show how
social and digital is changing the world.”

“All these industries are being revolutionized,” he says. “It’s come to technology first, but it
will reach every industry. You’re going to have businesses rise and fall faster than ever. I’m part
of a generation that thinks change is good or at least inevitable, so you might as well embrace it.”

Though now labeled on blogs as a tech hunk, Cashmore was sickly as a child, and turned to the
Internet both for engagement and socializing. It became a passion–and a way into the business
world. “When I started in Aberdeen, we didn’t have tech courses, it wasn’t startup land,” says
Cashmore, who finished high school two years late, due to various medical complications, and never
went to college. “I started writing about new companies, websites, and applications so I could learn
how it works and how to build companies. I didn’t know that was going to be the company.”

Meet The Rest Of Generation Flux

Other Flux-ers recommended by Pete Cashmore.

 

Ann Grimes
Director, Graduate Program in Journalism at Stanford
Bio

Josh Koppel
Co-founder and Chief Creative Officer, ScrollMotion
ScrollMotion

Terry McDonnell
Editor, Sports Illustrated Group
@SI_TMcDonell

Sharon Feder
Publisher, Mashable
@sharonfeder

Adam Ostrow
SVP Content and Executive Editor, Mashable
@adamostrow

Robyn Peterson
SVP Product and Tech, Mashable
@robynpeterson

“I’ve been quite comfortable learning as we go,” he says of Mashable’s business model. “When we
started, our core was covering startups and new companies. Then, when we saw that our audience was
active on social media, we built community alongside. Now that it’s clear digital runs through
everything in our culture, we want to be everywhere in our coverage: marketing, the Arab Spring, the
political realm, movies.”

So which of the more traditional industries that haven’t been totally disrupted by technology are
most likely to join his target list? “The bank is going to be next,” predicts Cashmore. “It hasn’t
been revolutionized yet, in part because of legal and security concerns. A kid in a garage can’t set
up a bank, right? But now you see it changing with Square, NFC chips. Wallets are going to phase out
over the next five or six years, it’s all going to change. It’s like the printed newspaper: It may
last in some form, but this is where the growth is going to be.”

That sort of disruption doesn’t concern Cashmore; it excites him. He feels the same way about
Mashable’s business. “I don’t have any personal challenges about throwing away the past,” he says.
“If you’re not changing, you’re giving others a chance to catch up. Even if you know everything
about a certain market now, in a few years you’re going to have to start from scratch like everyone
else.”

“Great brands do a great job of being a chameleon. Virgin America, Starbucks: They define a certain
kind of person and then build a tool-set around that person. Starbucks isn’t about coffee, it’s
about a culture.” This is what he’s trying to emulate in his business. “Everyone at Mashable is web-centric, digital-first–we’re all social in our DNA. Our audience is early adopters, and the staff
is from the same demographic.”

He recognizes that the age of Flux can be difficult for some people. “The typical mindset
understates the risk of not changing and overstates the risk of change,” he observes. “It’s just a
trait of being a human.” But in the big picture, he says, the need for change is overwhelming: “It’s
fundamentally a good thing: Human progress is accelerating. As a species, we have so many problems.
If we change fast enough, we could solve them before things become disastrous.”

Via Fast Company: http://www.fastcompany.com

Valve Interactive
An online marketing and design agency in Portland Oregon