Skip to main content

The Things We Don't Blog About

There is an old saying: “Those who know don’t tell, and those who tell, don’t know.”

We don’t hear honest stories enough but if we did I think that could be a catalyst for real change.

These are the things we should blog about more, not only because we need to vent and get support but also it’s the personal stories that reflect social reality.

  • The personal is political.
  • The personal is economic.
  • The personal is cultural.

The personal can change society for the better.

What happens when we proliferate the opposite? All the supposedly "authentic" and "unbiased" interviews, case studies, market research, Facebook posts, Tweets and blogs that are only there to sell.

Typically they have no disclaimer at all, because you're just supposed to know that they're promotional.

Truth be told, I have come to expect it but also feel a little angry trying to figure out the credentials of every piece of information out there. I fully understand that "product placement" is a value creator in the New Economy. But the longer-term consequence of undermining true social media is a culture of inherent distrust.

A couple of issues here:

  • How do we make it safe for people to share their personal experiences in a constructive way?
  • How can we establish rules of the road, so that business blogs and posts are clearly “marked” to the reader so that they know where your interests lie and so they can judge for themselves how big a grain of salt they should take it with?

We are seeing the rise of a transparency ethic that insists on peeling away the layers of the onion ruthlessly, even if it seems like no matter how much you do so there is always more underneath.

It’s one of those social experiments where we don’t have all the answers now, and so we will inevitably make many mistakes until we find some kind of balance.

The most important civil right we have is free speech. We shouldn't ruin it with phony sales talk.

All opinions my own. Photo by Philippe Teuwen via Flickr.

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between brand equity and brand parity?

Brand equity is a financial calculation. It is the difference between a commodity product or service and a branded one. For example if you sell a plain orange for $.50 but a Sunkist orange for $.75 and the Sunkist orange has brand equity you can calculate it at $.25 per orange.

Brand parity exists when two different brands have a relatively equal value. The reason we call it "parity" is that the basis of their value may be different. For example, one brand may be seen as higher in quality, while the other is perceived as fashionable.

All opinions my own. Originally posted to Quora. Public domain photo by hbieser via Pixabay.

What is the difference between "brand positioning," "brand mantra," and "brand tagline?"

Brand positioning statement: This is a 1–2 sentence description of what makes the brand different from its competitors (or different in its space), and compelling. Typically the positioning combines elements of the conceptual (e.g., “innovative design,” something that would be in your imagination) with the literal and physical (e.g., “the outside of the car is made of the thinnest, strongest metal on earth”). The audience for this statement is internal. It’s intended to get everybody on the same page before going out with any communication products.Brand mantra: This is a very short phrase that is used predominantly by people inside the organization, but also by those outside it, in order to understand the “essence” or the “soul” of the brand and to sell it to employees. An example would be Google’s “Don’t be evil.” You wouldn’t really see it in an ad, but you might see it mentioned or discussed in an article about the company intended to represent it to investors, influencers, etc.Br…

Nitro Cold Brew and the Oncoming Crash of Starbucks

A long time ago (January 7, 2008), the Wall Street Journal ran an article about McDonald's competing against Starbucks.
At the time the issue was that the former planned to pit its own deluxe coffees head to head with the latter.
At the time I wrote that while Starbucks could be confident in its brand-loyal consumers, the company, my personal favorite brand of all time,  "...needs to see this as a major warning signal. As I have said before, it is time to reinvent the brand — now.  "Starbucks should consider killing its own brand and resurrecting it as something even better — the ultimate, uncopyable 'third space' that is suited for the way we live now.  "There is no growth left for Starbucks as it stands anymore — it has saturated the market. It is time to do something daring, different, and better — astounding and delighting the millions (billions?) of dedicated Starbucks fans out there who are rooting for the brand to survive and succeed." Today as …