Now that we have world peace and the economy is under control, we can turn our attention to the important stuff, like President Obama’s Blackberry. Over the weekend, we learned he’s getting to keep his Blackberry, except, maybe it won’t be a Blackberry, but a super-secure Sectéra Edge from General Dynamics. Of course, Microsoft was quick to say, hey wait, he should use a U.S. product (i.e., one running Windows CE) rather than a Blackberry, a product from Canada, a country where lots of people speak French. No word yet from Apple, despite the iPhone playing a supporting role in his campaign communications success.
Unfortunately, the White House email server crashed this afternoon and no one there is getting email anyway. And you thought that just happened where you work.
President Obama’s love of his Blackberry is the type of unsolicited endorsement that comes along once in a marketer’s dream life. I’m sure there is some group crunching away at the equivalency value of the millions of mentions of the Blackberry brand in the media’s obsessed coverage of this puffery. The New York Times ran a story a couple of weeks ago suggesting Obama’s “endorsement” is worth $50 million to the brand.
And even with the device reportedly being the Sectéra Edge, every article is still using the word “Blackberry” to define the category of wireless device it is.
But is the Obamadorsement really helping Blackberry? According to the Wall Street Journal this morning, the company that markets Blackberry, Research in Motion, has sold only 500,000 unites of its new model, the Storm, about 20% of the units of the Apple iPhone that sold during the the same period after its introduction.
Even Obama can’t revive some things.
The notion that a President would actually “endorse” a product may seem far-fetched, but you could argue that Presidents spend a big chunk of their time doing ceremonial activities that are, in effect, a way in which they can lend their stature and media-big-stick to raise the attention of industries and causes. And it’s extremely well documented that if a President mentions he likes a book, the sales sky-rocket in a way that rivals only an Oprah nod. A recent example is the Obama-touted Team of Rivals and perhaps the best known example is Ronald Reagan turning Tom Clancy into a rock-star author by calling his Hunt For Red October “unputdownable.”
President Kennedy tried to pump up sales of a Navy buddy’s
hat company, but hat sales still sunk.
My favorite — and perhaps most obscure — story about an overt attempt by a President to help boost the sales of a product is one I read about years ago in the magazine American Heritage. Thanks to Google, I found the remembered article — actually an editor’s letter — on the American Heritage website* and the photo it describes (but is not on the American Heritage site) on the website of the JFK Library.
It has long been an urban legend that President Kennedy is the reason men stopped wearing hats in the early 1960s. (Snopes.com has a great de-bunking of the myth with photos of Kennedy wearing a top-hat at inaugural-day functions.) But the fact remains that Kennedy, who rarely wore a hat, was perceived even at the time as exacerbating the already-established trend away from hat-wearing by men.
However, President Kennedy one time purposefully had himself photographed with a hat as an active form of product endorsement — what today we’d call a “product placement.” He did it as a favor for a Navy buddy who had served with him on the famous PT 109.
Here’s how the story goes in American Heritage:
“After his PT service, (Al Webb) became vice president of sales for Cavanagh Hats. With his fellow skipper’s famous bareheadedness ravaging his enterprise, Webb had Cavanagh run up two fine custom hats and hurried to the White House to give one to the President and one to Kennedy’s long-time friend, a businessman named Red Fay.
“Al removed the hats from their boxes as though they were fragile Stradivarii,” recalled the writer William Manchester, who was on hand for the presentation. “Jack and the Redhead tried them on. . . . Al stood back to observe the effect. He said unconvincingly, ‘You both look great.’ Jack and Red looked at each other and burst out laughing. ‘Al,’ said the President, ‘are you willing to destroy the beloved image of our country’s leader just to save the hat industry?’” Manchester thought the hats made the two men “look like a couple of house detectives.” Webb retreated, “crestfallen.”
…”Kennedy met the challenge in his own way. The next day he greeted former President Eisenhower at Camp David and thereafter sent Al a picture of the great occasion: It showed Kennedy leaning forward, his right hand extended; in his left hand he held a hat, the lining facing out toward the camera. The Cavanagh Hats label was plainly visible!”
As stylish as Kennedy was, however, the hat never made a comeback in men’s business fashion.
And despite the well-publicized ‘addiction’ of President Obama to his Blackberry, it will be interesting to monitor what sort of sales bump his endorsement will have.
I’m a fan of author Christopher Buckley, whose novels are not only biting political satire, but often prove to be amazingly prescient. For example, the novel (not the movie) Thank You For Smoking, pre-dated the federal and state cigarette settlements with the tobacco companies, but predicted some of the more cynical aspects of what has played out: i.e., anti-smoking campaigns aimed at teenagers can “unintentionally” make smoking seem rebellious — and thus, cool.
Early this year, Buckley’s most recent novel, Supreme Courtship was similarly soothsaying in having as its central character, a Sarah Palenesque woman-of-the-people who is nominated to the Supreme Court after the novel’s President has a series of nominees fail the confirmation process (for rather unique and hilarious reasons).
What does the President hope will be the key to the confirmation of Judge Pepper Cartwright? She’s America’s most popular TV judge. And like Palen, Pepper Cartwright’s personality and down-home wit is central to her appeal.
Buckley’s target for ridicule in the book is a TV-culture that spawns a citizenry that has trouble distinguishing reality from reality-TV. Cartwright is a competent local judge, but her real talent is being good on TV — thus, she’s got what it takes to encourage the American people to rise up in support of her confirmation.
Earlier tonight, I couldn’t help but think of Pepper Cartwright when I read that CNN’s Dr. Sanjay Gupta has been approached to be Surgeon General. According to the New York Times, he is “a pick that will give the moribund office a higher profile.” Was Chris Buckley writing that, I wondered.
At least Dr. Gupta is an actual doctor, and doesn’t just play one on TV. And, no doubt, like Judge Pepper Cartwright, people who know him from TV will believe whatever he tells them.
However, if Dr. Gupta doesn’t accept the job, I recommend Dr. Derek Shepherd or Dr. Gregory House, either of whom will bring an even greater profile to the office.
And if they won’t take it, I recommend nominating someone who slept last night at a Holiday Inn Express.
Update: Upon further reflection, I’ve decided that Doc Searls would also bring a higher profile to the moribund office. “Good health is conversation,” would be his slogan.
The first thing you should do every day, is watch this 2 minute video mashup of key clips from some of the 40 greatest movie inspirational speeches of all time. Simply brilliant. Kudos to the mashup’s creator, Matthew Belinkie. [via: waxy.org]
Thanks to those who e-mailed me on Sunday to let me know this blog was off line. It happened as one of those unintended glitches that occur when you de-glitch something else. Fortunately, the glitch only affected my blog and some other items sitting on a server that hosts nothing commercial or business-related.
Typically, I would have noticed the site being down, but I was busy all weekend actively enjoying the glorious weather here in Nashville. Checking in with Twitter last night, I discovered there must have been some problems there also this weekend, as some of my friends who are heavy-duty users of the service noticed some (and came up with a fix for) performance issues.
And then, this morning, the voice-over-IP phone system in our office is having some issues (as in, no one can call us, but we can call out).
The parade of glitches reminds me a bit of last week’s episode of Southpark called “Over Logging.” It is a spot-on satirical commentary on the creeping cultural dependence on the Internet that has developed over the past decade. (Warning: There is some very intense — and gross — adult-related content in this episode — as there is in every episode of South Park.) There is much in the show that holds up a mirror to those of us who have forgotten what it was like in the old-days before, say, 1996.
Spoiler alert: The way in which the Internet is fixed is a classic geek-humor moment. And the plea at the end to not “over-log” the Internet is a clever jab at the faddish way in which some people treat “being green.”
It’s Monday. I’m back online. The Internet is working again.
[Note: This post is an observation and opinion piece about political advertising and is not any sort of endorsement. Disclosure: I have not stated anywhere publicly who I will vote (actually, "voted" as I did so early) for in the Tuesday presidential primary in Tennessee. And while I voted for a candidate, I have not made any contributions to any campaign and will remain undecided about November until the parties have selected their candidates. Note: See update at the end of this post.]
When I was a kid in the 1960s, every candidate for office had a campaign jingle. JFK’s campaign had one and, well, while it was a little before my time, perhaps the most famous early TV political campaign jingle was the one called, I Like Ike. Like commercial jingles for consumer products, the campaign jingle has been replaced with theme songs borrowed from pop or country repertoires of “classic hits.” But every campaign still has a song. And music is a part of every campaign stop of every candidate.
It’s rare, however, to witness the birth of a new genre of presidential political campaign advertising music. (And by “advertising,” I’m not referring to the narrow interpretation of advertising that would limit it to :30 or :60 second spots.) But that’s what we’re getting this weekend. With this video below, I think we’re witnessing a new genre of campaign song: One that blends the passion and striped down message and cadance of sixties protest-movement grassroots folk songs with “cause-jingles” of the 70’s (”Look for the Union Label”) and the slickly-produced commercial anthems that accompanied such 1980s events as “Live-aid.”
The result is this anthem which is perhaps some of the most brilliant use of music in a presidential campaign I’ve ever heard or seen (see embedded video.)
I can understand why a Clinton-supporter like my friend, Jeff Jarvis would want to dismiss this video as “only (underscoring) the notion that Obama’s campaign is the most rhetorical of the bunch: speeches and slogans so neat they can fit in 4/4 time.” That’s the equivalent of when your parents told you that rock music would turn your brain into mush. To me, it only underscores how remarkably rare it is to witness a break-through idea in the use of new media in politics. This is not “user-generated” or “amateur” media — the people who conceived, created, produced and appear on it are all pros at the top of their game. However, I predict that within the next 24 hours, you’ll see the beginnings of a flood of mashup versions in which college students and singer-songwriters and others will produce their own versions. And that’s when we’ll start to understand what this music is really about.
Another “break-through” aspect of this music video must also be its financing. While the producers claim not to know whether or not the Obama campaign even knows about it, the value it brings to the campaign will sky-rocket. It’s a little like the off-books value of “an endorsement,” except in this case, the endorsement is in the form of something that has the value of those Mastercard ads: Priceless.
Update: I have seen some blog posts saying the ad is from Moveon.org. The video does not have any information on it regarding that organization as a source — which it must disclose. Obviously, the financing of the production — if by Moveon.org — would be covered under the laws pertaining to 527 Groups. I’ve looked on the Moveon.org site and they, indeed, have endorsed Obama and are promoting the video — but there’s nothing there about them creating the video. While I’m no fan of Moveon.org, I still think this ad is amazing — sorta like when I enjoy an Oliver Stone movie.
Update II: S-town Mike (thanks) provided in a comment below, an e-mail from Moveon.org that promotes the video, but indicates it was neither funded or produced by the organization. Rather it echos what the ABC News piece above reports: it was conceived and produced will.i.am of the Black Eyed Peas and film director Jesse Dylan, son of Bob Dylan.
Update III: When I said, “within the next 24 hours, you’ll see the beginnings of a flood of mashup versions in which college students and singer-songwriters and others will produce their own versions. And that’s when we’ll start to understand what this music is really about,” this is what I meant. I’m sure we’ll see it done a lot better — and a lot worse. And after seeing this, I can also predict it will be subject to some really hilarious parodies, as well.
Last month, TVNewser echo’d — and I tweeted — what turned out to be a false rumor about TV Guide. The magazine is still coming out in print despite how believable it sounded when the rumor suggested there is no reason to have a TV Guide print version when TV Guide now exists on the TV.
However, beyond such conventional wisdom, there are things you can do with magazine subscribers that you can’t do with people who just click around on the web or channel surf on cable.
“ABC Entertainment and TV Guide are teaming up to give the magazine’s readers a Grey’s Anatomy hospital gown to promote the return of the show this season on Thursday, Sept. 27. The ABC branded-gown will be poly-bagged in the Sept. 24 issue of TV Guide, which will be mailed to subscribers in the New York and Los Angeles markets to coincide with the season four premiere of the show.”
Talk about delivering value. If only TV Guide subscribers in two markets receive the gowns, then, ABC and the magazine are handing out winning lottery tickets. A certain percentage of readers — over 50%, I guess — will instantly throw away the gown. Others will hang onto it and throw it away within a few days.
However, a few smart subscribers will not touch it — will not even open the polybag — and will sell it on eBay. As I’ve explained on this blog Grey’s Anatomy has one of the most “conversational” fan-bases in existence. And, since these collectible gowns are being distributed to a small segment of viewers, the after-market value of them will sky-rocket.
However, don’t open the polybag if you want to sell it on eBay. If you don’t, I feel certain you can receive a price worth many years of whatever you paid for that subscription through the Publisher’s Clearing House.
I have no idea whether these two items are related. However, yesterday, billionaire blogger Mark Cuban used a hyperbolic subject line to discuss his belief that the Internet has reached a state of “utility,” and is no longer where creative breakthroughs can take place. He says more bandwidth is needed for the really cool stuff. And by cool stuff, I guess he means the High Def content he’s creating. Anyway, today, SI.com is reporting that Cuban is going to be a cast member of the next series of “Dancing with the Stars,” starting next month. He’s a great two-stepper, I hear.
Later: I’ve just read a few of the reactions to Cuban’s “boring” post and must say that his title is what people are reacting to, not the point he’s trying to make. There are a lot of good things that are happening because developers are focusing on the “utility” part of the Internet — doing cools things that help make the web work for us better. I don’t disagree with his substance, I just don’t get how he can label what’s taking place “dead and boring.” By the way, the funniest comment I’ve read in response to Cuban’s post was from Howard Lindzon on this Fred Wilson post: “Substitute ‘Dallas mavericks’ for Internet.”
(Thanks, Hudge, who wonders if Cuban will go after the Dancing with the Stars judges like he goes after NBA officiating.)
He’s certainly old enough to go without me, but the 16-year-old allowed me to tag along on what has become a bi-annual tradition since he was in about the fourth grade: the midnight release of a Harry Potter book. As this is the final such release party — and something likely never to be replicated — I wanted to capture a bit of it on video. The 20-year-old is out of the country and I’m sure took part in something similar, but it was kind of sad for her not to be here. As you’ll see in the video, we did catch up with her (and our) best friend forever, who, along with my son, are perhaps the most over-the-top experts in Harry Potter trivia I know. Between the two of them, they’ve probably read or listened to each book dozens of times.
Speaking of my son, it is now about 3:00 p.m. CDT on Saturday and he has finished reading the book (the first of several times, no doubt). Without any spoilers, he says he can’t properly provide a review. He does say most of the back-stories are resolved and, well, I can’t say much more than that.
I’ll confess. This whole Miss USA controversy sorta got past me until my RSS newsreader lit up with it a few moments ago. Wouldn’t it have been more appropriate for Trump to bust out of the meeting and say, “You’re fired!” But no, Donald Trump has allowed her (and as I’m coming into this late, I don’t know her transgressions) do that which purifies all clay-feeted celebrities, “go into rehab.”
Quote (from the version of the NY Times article appearing about 2:30 p.m., e.s.t.):
“Tara is going to be the great comeback kid,” (Trump) later added. “Ms. Conner thanked Mr. Trump, her family and others, and noted that she had made a recent promotional appearance at a Target store.
“I have wanted this since I was 13 years old,” she said.
The following is a rhetorical question. I don’t really care what the answer is. I’m asking merely as a favor of writers for those of us who read news articles: What exactly has she wanted since she was 13 years old? To make an appearance at a Target Store? (I did it last night to pick up some razors.) To be turned into the pop-culture icon for stupid bimbosity? To go to New York and go crazy? I’m glad to know our 13-year-olds have such high goals.
This is weird, but intriguing. A photographer’s collection of portraits of people who look alike — but who are not related. Sort of an everyday people separated at birth project. It reminds me of this website that’s supposed to suggest what celebrity you look like. Earlier today, I pointed to an essay about a Washington Post article on “homophily” (”a somewhat grand word to describe the idea that birds of a feather flock together”). Technology makes it easier for us to find others like ourselves — even on a global scale. And while it should also help us discover those unlike ourselves, I guess it should come as no surprise that most people find it more compelling to discover and hang out with others who share their interests and points of view.
But I find it creepy that technology can also help you find other people who look like you. Frankly, I think a better use of such technology would be to help you find a a pet that looks like you.
