Hi! I'm Andy McIlwain (andymci). I'm blogging and writing about new media, social media, internet marketing strategy, web culture and online gaming from Kingston, Ontario. more...
Billy Mays has left us. Found dead in his Tampa Bay home by his wife, Billy Mays was only 50. His last Twitter update was roughly 24 hours ago. Nobody saw it coming.
The memorable TV pimp for all things useful, Mays spread the love of everything from OxyClean to Mighty Putty and the twist-n’-pop magic of the Ding King. Billy Mays talked in ALLCAPS IRL – and whether or not you loved him for it or hated him for it, you gotta admit, he was good at what he did.
My condolences and support go out to the friends and family of Billy Mays. Although many may write him off as being yet another sleazy TV pitchman, this guy was able to move product like no other (OxyClean is now available in stores!) and his method of delivery – loud, enthusiastic and direct – was something that I tried to emulate and incorporate into my own presentations in college.
Here’s a clip (audio only) of Billy Mays calling out Vince Offer (”the ShamWOW Guy”), challenging him to a pitch-off:
With the recent loss of Dom DeLuise, David Carradine, Michael Jackson, Farrah Fawcett and Ed Mcmahon, I can’t help but wonder what the hell is going on.
Jon Bon Jovi and Richie Sambora have partnered with Iranian superstar Andy Madadian to record a version of “Stand By Me”, dedicated to the people of Iran. The video/song is not meant to be sold. It’s not meant to hit billboard charts. It’s meant to be downloaded, shared, and distributed to the people of Iran as a gesture of support.
I won’t get into a long diatribe about the ongoing turmoil in Iran. There’s enough coverage of that going on from sources that are much more credible/knowledgeable on the subject than I am.
That being said, there are two reasons I’m posting this. First off, I’m a huge fan of Bon Jovi – his music is a cornerstone of my more pleasant childhood memories. Second, I like to draw attention to specific examples of social media / new media being used to support a cause.
Earlier this week, Bon Jovi and bandmate Richie Sambora recorded a version of Ben E. King’s classic “Stand by Me” with Iranian superstar Andy Madadian. Their mission: to send a message of global solidarity to the people of Iran who are caught in the midst of debate and protest over the country’s recent election.
We gave the new layout a shot with GTANet a little over a month ago, but received a few criticisms within 24 hours of the flip. So we went back to the old design. (We’ve since switched back up to the new layout since the July 15th announcement was made, fyi.)
The backlash shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone, though. When things change, people freak. When people freak, they get loud. Mob mentality sets in and then it all goes to hell:
Why would ya change it from good to crap? That makes no sense. For a moment I thought this was meant to improve it. Dunno why I thought that, obviously it’s meant to make it worse. Silly me!
Don’t bother changing it. The YouTube Nazi’s cannot force the people! Viva la old channel resistance!
YEA THE NEW CHANNELS SUCKS BALLS! change it back!!
And so on.
Personally? I welcome the new design – I think it’s a nice, much-needed change from the current format. Yes, there are still some bugs to be sorted out, but the YouTube team has been great thus far at rolling out bugfixes.
At some point soon, we’re going to have to make a serious decision: are we creating content for the power of search and to ensure that everything we think and publish is findable over the years, or is that dream about to die and we’re on the verge of creating content in real-time – in short bursts – that are meant to live and die in the moment? It could be a hybrid of both, but being able to index and navigate through the mass amounts of text, audio, video and images seems more and more like a daunting task versus a powerful and easy resource.
Whatever the case may be, the power of content’s value seems to be shrinking in terms of long-term worth and increasing in terms of “what’s happening right now.”
In my opinion, it’s a reality check.
We can’t be everywhere at once, we can’t listen in on thousands of conversations simultaneously, and we’ll never be able to sift through all of the content that constantly appears on a daily basis.
Website Magazine was passing out free copies of their June issue at SES Toronto. I picked one up. It’s an interesting read, as most trade publications are, and it does give a good starting point for discovering new businesses and services in this industry.
One article caught my attention pretty quickly. The editorial from Mike Phillips (Senior Editor at Website Magazine), entitled “Transparency is So 2008“, suggests that the popularity of the “transparency” term/concept is nothing more than a passing fad:
It refers to the idea that we should be completely open about what we do. Our content should be syndicated freely throughout the Web and the inner workings of our businesses should be bare for all to see.
Phillips goes on to draw a correlation between the ideas of transparency and free content:
You might find yourself spending hours creating a stellar blog post. Then you submit your content to every bookmarking service and social site you can find. You might enjoy a spike in the day’s website traffic, and perhaps make a few bucks from the resulting clicks on your contextual or display ads. But too often uninspired professionals resort to adapting another’s content and calling it their own.
This is where I started to raise an eyebrow. I’ve never associated transparency with free content (or “linkbait”) – they’ve always appeared to be mutually exclusive subjects. Here’s how I define them:
Transparency refers to being open and forward about what you (or your business) are doing. When major changes are made to your service, for example, you let your customer/client/audience/users know what changes were made, why they were made, and how it will affect them.
Free content (linkbait) refers to unique and relevant content that is intended to draw traffic to a site. As Phillips states in his editorial, this sort of content can often be picked up/covered by other sites with larger audiences. If these other sites are less-than-honourable, the original source (you) may wind up being disregarded altogether. When/if this happens, the time (money) spent on creating that content becomes a waste.
Needless to say, these are two very different things. One focuses on relationships while the other focuses on using content as a way to generate revenue.
I have no qualms with the suggestions that Phillips puts forth in his editorial. Premium memberships and pay-to-access content are viable strategies. I just disagree with the suggestion that free content = transparency.
Agree? Disagree? Are my definitions totally off? Let me know. Kick me some feedback.
YouTube has announced that they’re