Miami-Dade: We useless

Just a quick note today—I thought this was funny. Check out this blog post about the URL for Miami’s new water conservation initiative. Witness how “We use less” becomes “We useless.”

continue reading…

Fear spreads faster than swine flu

Yesterday I read Bob Hoffman’s amusing post about “death fatigue,” and it got me thinking about how much of the fear and fanaticism surrounding swine flu can be attributed to the name. It sounds awful. Much more unpleasant than bird flu, for example.

Then, on my 30-minute commute (plus or minus) into the office today, I heard 30 minutes (plus or minus) of NPR swine flu stories, and nothing else. I now know the status of swine flu preparedness for just about every country on Earth. A couple of the stories, both of which I found pretty amusing, were about groups that are upset about the name and the alternative names they’ve proposed.

continue reading…

Changing technology, and what it doesn’t change

You may have already seen this clip of Pattie Maes unveiling the “sixth sense” wearable technology at TED. If not, I recommend checking it out.

This clip, along with a great post by Steve Rubel about Open Web, has me thinking about what the future holds for technology, and how different organizations might be able to capitalize on it. Seems to me that Pattie’s talk and Steve’s post more or less point to the same trends:

continue reading…

The myth and misuse of “one thing”

Name the one thing that your company does. Think carefully before responding, because you’ll never be able to do anything else under the same brand name.

I think that’s a little extreme, but I was surprised to learn how passionately some people believe it to be true. About a week ago I wrote a short piece in response to Laura Ries’s post about UPS. In her post, Laura invokes a classic Ries line: “once your brand stands for something in the mind, it is impossible to change the brand’s position.” She goes on to use UPS (shipping), Kodak (film), and Blockbuster (video rental stores) as examples of brands that stand for just “one thing,” and therefore failed (or will fail, in the case of UPS) to be perceived as doing anything else well under that brand name. Follow her logic, and it’s why Kodak isn’t a leader in digital photography and Blockbuster’s Netflix-like service never took off.

I disagree.

continue reading…

Mommy and Daddy Do It Pro Bono

Are you a fireman, astronaut, or ballerina? Odds are against it, but if you have kids who look up to you, you may have sometimes wished you chose to do something a little more…inspiring. Thanks to a soon-to-be-published book by the founders of Taproot Foundation, your workaday career may have a shot at capturing your kid’s imagination after all.

continue reading…

All branding and no business

Just read this article by Laura Ries of Ries & Ries brand consulting. In it, she derides UPS for a recent ad campaign claiming that they do “more than shipping.”

Once your brand stands for something in the mind, it is almost impossible to change the brand’s position. UPS stands for shipping and the UPS Store stands for a place to ship. And that is not a bad thing, in fact it is an enormously profitable business.

Brands like UPS should reinforce their strengths in advertising and not try to expand into other companies’ categories.

I agree that brands need focus—that they should strive to stand for one thing in the minds of customers. But time and again Laura and her father/business partner, Al Ries, dole out advice without considering business realities. It’s unrealistic to assume that every business will do one thing only, forever. After all, one benefit of a strong brand is the “permission” it gives to extend into other relevant categories.

continue reading…