A Case for Social Media, Outreach, Marketing and Distribution Producers

The first time I heard of a 50/50 film budget, I was like, yeah, right, like I’m going to spend 50% of my production budget on M&A (Marketing & Advertising).

That was the fall of 2009 after having spent all but $1K of my budget on MAKING a film. The remaining 1K was earmarked for festival submissions.  Not long after I started spending my own money to cover outreach and marketing expenses so the film would meet some deserving eye balls.  Not including my labor, 20% of the production budget for distribution seemed about right.  But then I started factoring in my time and realized how long an outreach, marketing and distribution process lasts. 50% now was very reasonable.

Where to Hide? Part 2

In “Where to Hide? Part 1”I talked about finding people online without much information to go by.  The story to follow  talks about the ‘other’ direction; being found.

It’s early 2008, the world is still in order and people go to work at Lehman Brothers:  I had a conservative client who apparently was close to circles that where close to the pope… kinda one, or two degrees of separation.  This just to make the point in what way the client was conservative.

I was working as a media consultant for the CEO. After a few months Clock Wise’s role was to be expanded into producing video content.  Since it was a sizeable budget Clock Wise needed to be vetted.  With nothing to worry about, I foresaw no problems.

Where to Hide? Part 1

I’ve written a bit about on-line privacy in the past months, and how can one ignore the topic with the N.S.A. scandal and the Snowden leaks.  In this and the next post I want to share a story each of on-line privacy issues from opposite directions.

 

The first and most recent story begins with a conversation I had over dinner with a guy who told me about his ex (which wasn’t all that “ex” as it turns out, but that’s a hole other topic and not for this blog). From the conversation I had gathered the following information:

Context - Part 3

A guest post Leadership Unplugged on Brian Solis’ site (yes, again) started out being about leadership and then went into context and content.  Written by Roland Deiser and Sylvain Newton the article makes some very relevant points about an ‘unplugged’ and less perfect leadership style in a fast changing and moving world.  What struck the nerve for me were the following paragraphs:

Social (yawn) Media – Social (what?) Business

The title sums it up: the term social media is a tad overused and social business is in theory happening but not really and who really gets it (other than Brian Solis)?

 

To start the conversation I want to highlight a few blog posts I’ve been reading by the “initiated”. They all just so happen to have been guest posts on Brian Solis’ blog as well as Brians’ two cents.

 

October of this year Chris Heuer wrote a guest blog on Brian Solis’ site with the title “Social Business is Dead! Long Live What’s Next”. In response Philip Sheldrake writes in November on the same blog: “Impatience is a Virtue: What’s Next for Social Business”.  And then Brian Solis sums it up in December with: “Social Business in not Dead: New charts and data reveal the real evolution of social businesses”. 

Social Media for Business

17 Gapingvoid Cartoons That Will Change Your Business from gapingvoid

I've followed Brian Solis for a long time and have read both his books: What's the Future of Business and The End of Business as Usual. If you are in any way shape or form interested how Social Media impacts EVERYTHING - not just business - both are a must-read and well worth your time.

The cartoon above links to slide share and shows a quick summary of some of Brian's and his design collaborator, Hugh MacLeod aka @gapingvoid comments on social media insights.  My favorite is slide 20.... the prosa summary is:  

ignorance + arrogance = irrelevance.  (Nuf said)

Remember that for all eternity!

Let’s “Meta” one More Time

The New York Times Magazine had a “Riff” on Meta, called “Welcome to the Age of Heavy Meta” by Devon McCann Jackson (aka David Zweig).  A highly recommended read.  He says it so much more elegantly than I did in my riff, “Big Data, Megatrends and Meta Trends” in this blog back in July. The article’s subtitle sums it up perfectly: “Somewhere between Aristotle’s “Metaphysics” and “Family Guy”, the world “meta” became shorthand for wry knowingness.  But the advent of metadata shows us just how much – and how little – we truly know.”  

Blogging

The other night I found myself at the bar of one of my favorite restaurants, Cedric in Harlem and sadly watched Roger Federer lose a match in the quarter finals in Flushing. After getting over my Swiss pride being hurt, I started a conversation with the gentleman sitting next to me and we soon where in a deep conversation about blogging and selling.  His wife has a flower boutique, Katrina Parris Flowers a few blocks from my house and they are big on social media. 

Crowd Funding a Year Later: One Success – One Bomb – Part 11

Gary Delfiner, Rob Barabas, David Mandel (blog interviewee),
Aubrey Levy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A year ago we accompanied David Mandel and his partners on the Kickstarter campaign for their feature Mulligan.  Here, a year and one more Kickstarter campaign later, a wrap up.

David: you now have two Kickstarter campaigns under your belt one, the feature Mulligan very successful the other, a documentary Indestructible Baseball on the Isthmus not so. Can you tell us where the big differences were between the two campaigns in terms of preparation, staffing, ask level, execution and leverage with ‘goodies’?

Olymic Coverage

When worlds collide...  As the Summer Olympics 2012 are wrapping up I’m a bid sad, as I missed the entire thing and for several reasons.  Most importantly, I had better things to do – like get myself out of the house and enjoy the Swiss Alps and do some moving around myself.  Secondly: I was abroad and had no TV where I stay and thirdly, it never occurred to me that the first and second reason would prevent me from seeing highlights;  I had planned on watching what interested me virally, but apparently I got stuck somewhere between TV monopoly (anybody say NBC?), the Organizing Committee of the Olympic games and 2005. Seriously?

So here we are, 2012 and YouTube has been around for, say, seven years and we’ve (or at least I have) heard a lot about that nifty synergy where videos go viral and then garner more hits (as in clicks on the web) and more interest and move traffic to the source of the video.  Sound familiar?  Well, maybe to you, but not the Organizing Committee of the Olympic Games, NBC nor any other TV station that paid a g’zillion to secure exclusive broadcast rights.  

What on earth was NBC thinking when they delayed broadcasting the day’s events to the evening prime time slot when the games where in London, five hours ahead of the East Coast?  Did they seriously think they could control the internet and social media?  Why not go live AND show the highlights in the evening?

Did the OCO think they could control Social Media without consequences?  They sure tried hard for the past two weeks.  What happened to our 1^st Amendment?

The OCO is taking down all YouTube video of the current games and has threatened sanctions against athletes who tweet and mention their sponsors. See this guest post on the Brian Solis blog by Eric Schwartzman. It sums up the Olympic social media fiasco beautifully. 

And go on YouTube and search ‘Olympics 2012’ and click on say, synchronized swimming. I did and for a moment I was wondering why the swim suits were a tad old fashioned, but guess what, the clip is from 1984. Click on any other video of the 2012 Olympic Games:  NONE are from the current games. 

The OCO had a great opportunity to show the world how traditional and social media can play hand in hand and benefit from one another and share synergies and allow for a singular situation where the context is perfect to create and SHARE amazing media moment after media moment.  They failed miserably; going Orwellian on us instead à la 1984 and showing us the ugly side of “Big Brother is Watching You”.

Good bye London, no tears shed as I’m clueless as to what happened and hello Rio de Janeiro 2016 – please get it right.

Crowd Funding – Where the Hell is my Gift? – Part 10

I feel like a three year old: I want my gift and I want it now.  Now, now, now!  

So, I did a bit of research and after I’m feeling more like a ten year old. Intellectually I understand the fact that instant gratification is not always possible and that a reward waits in the future, but I still want my gift now, darn it.

I have invested in three projects on Kickstarter, a book, a cultural center and a film. Of course I have not invested in either, I have invested in PARTS of either:  small parts.  And herein lays the problem.  We (the Kickstarter community) invest in our friends’ and colleagues’ projects, or causes we are passionate about and more than not they are asking for donations to cover parts but not all of their funding needs. 

If I fundraise 10K for research of a documentary film I would be foolish to promise the finished film. First off, the delivery would be a few years from now and secondly I would not be able to guarantee delivery to begin with, because too many things can happen from research to finished film.  This seems too basic to have to mention, but I guess I do: make your pledges such, that you can deliver and do so on time. And in the interim: communicate!

There needs to be as much thought given to the fundraising part as to the delivery.  The goal is not only achieving our monetary goal by a certain date, but also - and equally important if not more important - the goal has to be to deliver on your pledge promises.  The dates for delivery have to be realistic and the goods or services to be delivered have to be realistic. And in the interim: communicate! (No, not a mistake – I just want to make that point again).  Shit happens, if it does: communicate.  Things get delayed:  communicate.  The creative process is a slippery one:  if it takes a lovely detour: communicate. 

I give you the three examples of the projects I have supported.  I did re-read and watch each of their pitches and here’s what works and what doesn’t.

Although I have waited the longest for Clouse’s Houses, the author Carol Clouse did a fine job managing expectations, explaining plan B upfront and keeping her backers up to date throughout the year she said it would take to finish her book.  Her fundraising goal was $5,000 which she reached June 22, 2011 with $5,055.  I pledged $25 to receive the book and an art card and to support (most importantly) the editor of the book for whose professional services the fundraiser took place. Needless to say, the editor, Barbara Fischkin is a friend of mine.  It’s a bit over a year, but the last communication to backers was six days ago and I’m apparently getting a 2^nd edition (after mistakes where discovered in the first) and it will be shipped to me by August 1^st.  

Good job: A. Why: Communication throughout the process.

The feature film Mulligan set out to raise $10,000, which it did by December 31, 2011 with $11,528. I pledged $50 to receive a golf ball and tee, both branded with the Mulligan logo, which I received promptly, but I am waiting on the digital download of the film and the score (both promised for May 2012).  

I just mailed with David Mandel who wrote on this blog about the behind the scenes launch a Kickstarter campaign and he says “they’re on it”.  Last Kickstarter communication: April 9, 2012. 

This would seem to be a quick and easy fix. You’re finishing a feature film, you don’t have a professional staff and you’re probably juggling a few new projects to keep paying the rent.  Make sure you make one person responsible of posting updates on a regular basis and everybody is going to be happy.  But you NEED to update.  And: if you think you’ll be done by May 2012 – add three months to be safe.  

Fair job: B+. Why: they did a partial delivery early on, but then got sloppy on their communication and delivery.

Now, on to the outfit that will make a Kickstarter success harder for the rest of us who come after.  Last summer I supported the cultural center Park51 (NYChildren Exhibit: Let’s open Park 51’s doors to the world!) for many reasons, one being that I was going to show my film there in conjunction with the exhibit NYChildren which ties in nicely with my film Abraham’s Children and the cultural center itself.  Park51 reached their fundraising goal of $70,000 on August 10^th, 2011.  

I pledged $25 to receive the book of the NYChildren exhibit, which was available for purchase at Park51.  This was September 2011. The last communication to backers on Kickstarter was posted on October 4^th, 2011. No book, no explanation and this organization has professional staff.  

Failure: F. Why: no delivery, no communication AND the book exists. Double boo!

This is the moral of the story: if it weren’t for the fact that I was supporting FRIENDS I’d not go back on Kickstarter to support a project.  I think the Kickstarter model is awesome and I hope one day to be one of the successful fundraisers to be added to a list of great creative projects at exceeded fundraising goals, but without delivery of pledges it doesn’t work and will increasingly work less, if potential backers, other than your parents, siblings and spouses, shy away after being ‘burned’.  Set realistic delivery goals and keep on communicating – it takes so little to do so, so do it!

Links and Plain Old Plagiarism

Sometimes an opportunity or a trend just hits you over the head every which way.  You guessed it: time for a blog entry on the topic of plagiarism, or maybe we call it links, pingback, copy and borrowed.

(As an aside: plagiarize is one of my favorite English words. I learned it as a teenager listening to Tom Lehrer songs and was mighty proud to know such a difficult word – the song in question is on YouTube.  If you don’t know Tom Lehrer – you must! Harvard mathematics professor fired for singing political songs back in the 50ies and 60ies; darkly funny, cynical and on the money with his social observations.)

To the point: I met with a serial entrepreneur last week. We were connected through an acquaintance. I had looked at his LinkedIn profile, looked at his newest venture and figured he’d be interesting enough to meet.  We met and turns out he’s a twenty something. I went back to his bio on LinkedIn and looked at the dates more carefully.  It seems this young man has achieved more since high school than most of us will in a live time. He told me that he didn’t want to waste his time with University he had too many ideas of what he wanted to do so he DID them. 

I visited his blog and found a profoundly funny and interesting infographic on getting things done (I’m a fan of that; getting things done I mean), some of the infographic. I do not agree with but that’s beside the point.  On a second visit to his blog, now with a bit more time on hand to read further I see that the infographic is linked to a different source. Totally legit, but still, I felt a tiny bit put off, because for that 12-or so hour span in-between I thought he was beyond brilliant – which I’m sure he is, but not THAT brilliant – as in coming up with THAT infographic.  I was wondering if I’m just too naïve, or if I missed the point somehow.  

I subscribe to the wildly popular Swiss Miss blog, not only because I know Tina (she designed the first Clock Wise Website back in the 90ies), but also because her blog is a collection of all things design – and her taste is towards the clutter-free, clean, minimal, fun and very sophisticated.  Through her blog posts I found another design blog that I liked enough to subscribe to it as well, only to find out that I looked at the same content every once in a while. Are there enough readers or subscribers for both to duplicate? It seems so.  Do they copy from each other, or do the same people submit their ideas to both. I guess the latter.  

It begs the question however, where does link end and plagiarize start? Is this a cultural phenomenon or a generational one?  Are we faster to read a visual image and to ‘link’ it to the publisher without paying attention much to its true origin?  Why do the links on Swiss Miss not bother me and why was I bothered with the infographic on the serial entrepreneur’s blog?

It’s all about trust and context.  Today’s hyperlinks are the footnotes of yesteryear.  The difference is that formats of delivery and context change from blog to blog.  With the overflow of information I choose a few blogs and newsletter to deliver information (of whatever kind) and with that I curate content and I do so by choosing trusted sources (see earlier blog entry on trust agents).  Swiss Miss is a trusted agent and her blog is set within the context of: “I show you the design world through my eyes”. Naturally that means she goes out and curates for me, the reader, and I know that I’m looking at other people’s work (be it jewelry, art, design elements or furniture). On the other hand the young serial entrepreneur is not a trust agent (yet) and so with I was missing context. 

But there is also the cultural versus the generational phenomenon.  Americans are much more at ease in passing along a great idea without much concern about, or burden of crediting the source.  A Swiss person would much more so be reluctant to pass an idea along without making sure it was clear that they really aren’t the brilliant ones to come up with the idea in the first place – this modesty also creates a buffer of “not my idea originally” when it falls flat.   

As for the generational difference: stuff gets shared and if possible for free, this holds true for my generation to a big degree, but even more so for a younger generation of millennia, irrespective of culture. Not only geographical boundaries are taken down by the World Wide Web (sic), but also intellectual property rights are fuzzy at best, and I’m not talking about the major film studios, record labels and publishers. Context is important and ‘knowing’ your source.   

The moral of the story:  make the context of your blog entries crystal clear, hyperlink diligently and only plagiarize when you’re sure the idea is beyond brilliant and you WANT to be credited for it (oh, and take some error and omissions insurance out).   

When to Send an Email

As I’m doing some reading on my next blog post I came across this tongue in cheek post by Seth Godin on WHEN to send an email and to go with it and even funnier infographic below (or use link for bigger format).    On a more serious note, but no less insightful, a post by Chris Anderson with some really good points to consider.  

My biggest email pet peeve that makes my toes curl is when someone sends an email with the message: “see below” or worse: “FYI”.  “FYI” what? The attachment, the 10 pages of correspondence below, that fact that you just outed yourself as a complete moron?  You have no CLUE what you’re fishing for. 

I remember being yelled at (yes, in all CAPS) by a vendor (no less) for continuing a conversation with his technician but on a different topic and not changing the subject line.  In hindsight I agree with him totally (minus the yelling) when he chided us that he would be misfiling our email conversation if it didn’t have the right subject line.  I had to ruefully think of him recently when I took advantage of a new (at least to me) feature on Outlook where email ‘conversations’ get bunched together.  It was a great feature until I sent out a whole bunch of emails with the subject line “thank you”, (this to be filed under: no good deed (thanking someone) goes unpunished). My ‘thank yous’ where very varied and the different conversations had no businesses being all bunched together under one conversational string, but that’s exactly what outlook did (and don’t tell me that’s a PC thing, ‘cause it ain’t). Totally idiotic. 

As for cc’ing: most people’s banes of existence are all the cc emails that need to be digested.  Here I’m of the mind that today where I do not necessarily sit in the same office with my production team anymore I want to be cc’ed on EVERY email.  Yes, a lot of reading but it makes up for not being in the same room or office suite anymore. It keeps me in the loop, but that might also have to do with my line of business.

Next time I send out a marketing email from Clock Wise I’ll try to look at my email addresses a bit more carefully (yuikes).

Via www.FastCoDesign.com

The Importance of Local

As I am sloshing through “Within the Context of no Context” by Georges Trow I find myself torn between total awe for his insights and alienation for his fragmented writing style and the realization that it is the style that makes the reading so thought provoking and painful but also beautiful.  I’m a fast reader and this is a slim volume, but this book is one paragraph, often just one sentence, at a time reading. I’ve been digesting “Within the Context of no Context”, morsel by morsel for well over a year. 

Today I came across ChrisBrogan’s latest blog entry about how “local” will become more and more important, and I immediately had to think of “Within the Context of no Context”.  It made me realize just how much more we feel disconnected the bigger our virtual reach becomes and that a need for immediate connectedness and belonging to a smaller subset that is ‘manageable’ might not be filled in the physical world, especially where business is concerned. 

Trow talks about those opposing forces as quadrants. The quadrant of man alone and the quadrant of all (in this case all Americans). Trow writes about the loneliness of man in terms of one person looking for a connectedness in a one-way relationship with the TV (Trow’s essay was originally published in the New Yorker and as a book in 1981) and how we personalize and ‘make our own’ the stars and TV personalities we watch every day in an effort to shrink the distance between our quadrant of physical living and experiencing and the quadrant of the rest of America. Trow might as well have been talking about the internet 2.0. 

I would that that a step further and say, that the larger our network becomes the more we become a group of one in the physical world.  In an effort to manage our growing reach, we create an “us”, which in our own eyes encompasses “all”, but really only means an “us”; a group who’s sentiments, or geography, or political views we share. Everything beyond “us” is foreign and out of our reach, sic understanding. This, also a powerful explanation for any ‘club-yness’ to the exclusion of ‘the other’ (another favorite topic of mine). 

The internet has made the stakes higher and the distance between man and the ‘rest of the world’ more distant. Trow’s quadrants have moved even further apart.  Any business who understands to fill the void between the quadrants has a lottery ticket in hand.  

If a business can reach out and have a meaningful two-way interaction with its customers on a global, virtual, all-connected platform, AND can give them their local 'heroes’ on the ground (as Chris Brogan calls them) – it will have a very powerful brand and a very strong relationship with its customers and consumers indeed.

Information Onslaught

Last Tuesday I had a drink over at my neighbor’s house and saw that they had their television set to Obamas State of the Union Address. I offered to come back later or listen to it with them.  We ended up chatting while there was a long segment of congress people and senators walking into the room and greeting each other and by the time I left the President had only just started speaking. I thought to myself, that they should have started the program and timed it to start with the actual address.  

I was little surprised when the next day a poll showed that most viewers didn’t stay on the channel long enough to listen to the speech.  Of course not!  We have 8 (!) seconds (!) in a YouTube video to engage our audience, then they’re gone.  TV shows might get a whopping 90 seconds.  

There are too many things tugging at our sleeve to pay attention to things at length anymore and I’m not talking about children or attention seeking pets and husbands.  When I try to settle into a longer article I actually get a bit jumpy and page to the back to see how long my commitments is going to be and if I want to even start to engage.  Books for fun (and I used to be a voracious reader) have been relegated to the vacation back burner and even then I have to make a time commitment to read a few books.  

The other day I heard an interview on TV (while I was either cooking, exercising or cleaning up social emails) where Tom Brokaw (I think) was talking about a new book and said, that today it’s not enough anymore to read the local newspaper and a few trade magazines and listen to the radio on the way to work and watch the evening news.  We ALSO need to plow through a plethora, or should I say onslaught of information form the net.

I WISH I had time to do all the things Tom Brokaw listed – I’m glad if I manage the New York Times and my Swiss weekly newspaper and the morning news. The blogs I subscribe to get a quick glance and I have an ever growing list of blog entries I have to read, I WANT to red, but oh, so little time. 

We thought reading and writing was dead! Social media has changed that to a certain extent; even if the social media prose is not what we (old people) learned in school. I’m reading a New Yorker article (yes, I know) about the kid that was spied on by his roommate in college and committed suicide after the roommate blasted the internet with the news that he was gay and showed video of him engaging with another man.  The article shows excerpts from the texts that went back and forth between these college freshmen and their friends. I’m reading “IDC”, what?  IDC? I don’t care.  My favorite was that the article was full of “WTF”.  We can now officially use the “F” bomb in a reputable magazine because it’s not spelled out, just WFT.  But, I digress.

So, where does this leave us? In a world where we need to be ever more expert at what we do and retreat into a smaller niches to then find out that we have kinda lost the bigger picture (think onion peel) of your work world, your kids world, your community world, your country world and let’s not forget, art, literature, the latest food fad and the newest technological advances, what your phone can REALLY do and you had no clue?  This morning on the news (NY1):  the app is dwindling.  Today the average user uses less than five apps in a week. They didn’t say how much that’s down from before but my guess is SIGNIFICANTLY.  At some point we have to do the dishes and get some work done. 

I circle back to an earlier post on: Curation and the Human Algorithm. I think curation of information will become ever more important to help us manage knowledge without going under in a sea of distractions and inert information. 

How do YOU manage your information flow?  How have your habits change since the first onslaught of social media and blogging?  Are you digging out from under?