Nutella gone nuts: brainy marketing or brainwashing?

It's Monday morning, so of course the week has to open with one lawsuit or another, just to get us all out of bed with a smile! This time it's news of a woman from the USA (naturally) who sued the makers (Ferrero, Italy) of the popular choconutty spread, Nutella, because she claimed she was misled by their marketing, and was unknowingly feeding her kids the opposite of what she believed. How much longer is the legal system going to allow us to play dumb and illiterate, when we use some product for years, then a light bulb suddenly flashes on, or worse, we get some disease directly attributable to the product (as depicted even on the product wrapping!), and we sue the maker. All the while claiming "I thought that smoking was good for stress, your honor, I had no idea it could actually kill people!". Especially in these times of enlightenment and heightened awareness of what goes into foodstuffs that go into us, do mothers not take a nanosecond over years to read product labels, for their kids sake at least? I am not talking about additives or colorings, and blah blah blah. In general, I mean looking at the first three or four, and scanning for salt, sugar, corn syrup, saturated bacon fat, and other crap. 

Now, I have seen the Nutella ads, and while they do claim that Nutella is a great way to kick start the kids' day, and provide them with the energy they need to jump into the morning, this is not quite the same as implying that it is pushed as a healthfood product. How smart do we need to be to realize that anything associated with chocolate flavor is not highly likely to be the best choice? Additionally, how smart do we need to be to know that when the kids love it and demand it every day, that, ahem, there has just got to be a sugar or fat injection going on here?! If Nutella had been so misleading, how come they were not told to pull back on their claims, like say Cheerios' makers were, for pushing too hard on their capacity to lower cholesterol? Yes, the inclusion of Nutella spread was claimed to be a useful part of a healthy, balanced diet, but guess what? It probably is! When it's taken in moderation, like almost everything else in life. They very clearly state that the major ingredients are hazelnuts, a little cocoa, and skimmed milk. I do not see what is deceitful about that, unless they furtively add in sugar and fat to increase it's addictiveness. Additionally, hazelnuts, like all nuts, contain fat, but like fish, the oils in nuts tend to be associated with both reduced weight gain/heart problems in most people. So a cheeseburger it is not. 

How can one prove that one did not intend all along to sue, after reading the label three years ago, but using the product in the meantime? Such as the cases where smokers have sued the tobacco companies, but only suing once they have a disease. 

The crazy thing? I fully expected it to be tossed out, but the Mom won a $3M class action settlement. Only in the USA, quite literally. Even though the majority of the product is made here in Canada, in Ontario, and the marketing is directed from Toronto, no settlement applies north of the border. So? Now all  US Nutella eaters who apply under the terms agreed will receive a $4 refund. I think this is a big mistake and could signal real problems for the brand: give people back money for buying your product, but expect them to maybe use that cash to buy more of said product? After what has to appear like an admission of guilt, over the fact that Nutella, is, in fact, very bad for you?

I say don't worry about your four bucks. Kids will be kids, and like all illicit addictive substances, Nutella will be driven underground, and onto the school playgrounds, where the black market price of a precious jar of Nutella will surely skyrocket. Once the product is withdrawn, it will be possible to obtain a king's ransom for a jar. Right now, somewhere, some very smart kid has cleared out all the local stores, and will open a website and Facebook page in a year or so, selling a relabeled jar for a huge mark-up, and become a millionaire in the process. Ridiculous, maybe. But only a little more ridiculous than the entire story. 


For marketing types, it's a question of whether Nutella ads were truly a case of brilliance in marketing, and they made so much money thus far, that the $3M is peanuts (or hazelnuts!), or, they did knowingly and wrongly imply that it is a health-promoting product, realizing that  its addictiveness would carry it forward through years of massive sales and profits? Let's be frank here, all marketing is to some extent a form of brainwashing. The manipulation of people is what it is all about, even for a product that actually is good for them: they need to be made aware of it and manipulated into procuring it. The public simply needs to be smart, and not only realize that we are always potentially being played, but also, that if one cares so much about what goes into our mouths to go through the expense and crap associated with a lawsuit, then perhaps we should have read the label in the first place. That's all I have to say on this nutty subject! ;) - Kevin Mc 

Cappuccino, anyone?!

You know? April this year has been by and large a grey, windy, chilly and rather sombre affair. We enjoyed a major teaser around St. Patrick's day, with June-like weather, but of course it was never going to last. In any case, April is about to be behind us and for sure there are warmer days and longer nights stretching out ahead of us now. The cocooning is almost over. But it's still not warm enough yet to be out doing things like staining decks and spring planting and BBQ set-up. So on this sunny, blowy Sunday morning, why not grab a delicious custom-made cappuccino like the one shown above, and curl up inside for one last cosy weekend morning, lost in a good (EU) book. Relax! ;)   EU

Is it time to end the hunt for Nazis?

I read with intrigue today that Quebec is home to someone who is ranked as highly as #4 on a very undesirable list: the Simon Wesenthal Center's most-wanted former Nazis. A stark contrast to that individual's current life in Ormstown, QC, where he quietly tends to his honeybees. He entered Canada after WWII, but it was determined by the Federal Court in 1999 that he lied to get in; denying having been a volunteer for the Germans during the war, in order to obtain Canadian citizenship. Furthermore, he was associated with a Ukraine battalion that was thought to be responsible for numerous atrocities there, which wiped out thousands of Jews over a three year period. Additionally, new evidence has appeared that he was a key participant in the vicious wiping out of an entire village, known as the Khatyn Massacre, in Belarus. The Canadian government overturned the revocation of his citizenship in 2007, but the new evidence seems set to re-open the discussion once more. 

Of course, the key question here is: for how much longer is it legitimate to go Nazi-hunting, and what are courts supposed to do with a 91 year old individual in the last years of his (or her) life? One of the major problems, historically, has been the public voice of governments (including Canada) stating that they are dead against harboring of those associated with war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity, but at the same time, an apparent lack of political will to actually see it through. It was one thing back in 1945, but it's 2012 people, shouldn't we be moving on? Naturally, the real problem here was the so-called "ratline" that allowed the monsters to escape Europe and head particularly to South America, where they were both welcomed and harbored. It is claimed that at that time, even here in Canada, that it was easier to get citizenship as a Nazi war criminal than it was as a Jewish refugee. The bottom line is that such types should never have seen another free day in their sick, miserable excuses for lives. But what to do with someone today, suspected of this or that, when memories have faded, evidence has evaporated and most witnesses are no longer with us?

It is a sensitive issue, not least for those who had relatives that were exposed to the atrocities of the Nazi regime, and who quite understandably never want to forget what happened. How do we assess someone's beliefs today, who might well have committed horrific things when, say, 25, but is now 90-plus years old and takes care of his bees? Can we assume that they have come full circle and realized how wrong they were, perhaps due to decades of being a tortured soul, agonizing over what one had been responsible for, and repenting and ultimately "cleansed" in the process? Or, do we stand before the 91 year old, look into his eyes, and see the brute they were at 25, and lock them up until death takes them? 

For the sake of humanity, peace, the law, and being able to move on, I feel that where there is sufficient evidence to put them to trial, then we do so. The argument that "do you really think a 91 year old man is going to kill anyone now?" is simply not good enough. We do not let murderers in Canada slink off to a new country where they can rehabilitate themselves, denying any wrongdoing, and expecting mercy as it has been 20 years since. They are subject to the law and to the courts. This is little different. Where one committed atrocities against humanity, one needs to pay, at any later time.  

The fact that so many of them were able to scuttle off the ship like the rats they were, into countries such as Canada, that pride themselves on human rights, immigration and freedom is where the problem lay and lies. Rather than face the music, they reverted to the cowardice that underlies all "bullying" to some extent, and ran into hiding. For sure, a quiet little life in rural Quebec would seem like heaven after WWII, especially if you had tortured and killed thousands of people whose right to that same peace you personally stole from them. - Kevin Mc

A local delicacy, served by a legend in the East of Quebec

Sometimes one just has to let go, and live a little. Especially if one sees snowflakes and is chilled by blowing gales and close-to-zero temperatures, and yet it's effectively May! Weren't we all sitting outside sipping early summer cocktails, back around St. Patrick's day?! 

Fine! So comfort food is not out the window just yet, and we can still use some stick-to-your-ribs nourishment to get us through such tough times. This is a Quebec staple, poutine, and in this case, the smoked meat varietal. Served by Monsieur Poutine himself, who has to approve of any individual, and not a family, ordering his extra large smoked meat poutine. In inexperienced hands, and stomachs, this can end up in an emergency room with the poor victim unconscious due to his-her system requiring that all normal functions are shut down so that the body can digest it: a mixture of thick golden brown fries, chunks of home-made cheese, thick slices of juicy smoked meat, all slavered in a thick, rich gravy. Pure heaven, and enough calories to build a house on! Snow, cold and wild winds? I say, rejoice! - Kevin Mc 

Political correctness or ratings: which is King?

It's very interesting to see the double standards by the major networks when it comes to humanoid behavior. Early on in the day, one is served news'n'views where even the slightest aberrance in "normal" behavior is frowned upon, and gets that sanctimonious quip from Matt Lauer, or other talking head. "It's okay to have a drink before dinner, but I mean, she was in there from like 5pm to what must have been almost 8-9pm!" Absolutely shocking! I find it humorous to say the least that because someone can read a teleprompter (it's not that easy you know, look at Ann Curry!) and get paid stupid amounts of money for doing so, they suddenly seem to think that their own opinion or insight is either of any significance, or is of interest to anyone. They are a talking head who reads lines that are written by others, on subject matters that have been researched by others, and which yet others have selected for programming. De facto, an authority on nothing, other than taking cues from floor staff and camera personnel, and producers beyond them, reading their lines, and exiting in time for the ads. Remind me why this allows some to think that the audience actually looks to you for your opinion, on anything? Ah yes, it's true, the new contract is for a ridiculous $500,000 per week, so of course one must be an amazing intellect and all-round educational guru, right? Wrong.  

But we have to listen to condescension and holy sanctimony over people having affairs, sexscapades, partying, teenagers and drink, drugs, sloth, bullying and that girl who ate 50 cream donuts for her breakfast while someone in the same room died from hunger, beside her. Blah, blah, and blah. We get the equivalent of the daily sermon served to us with breakfast on how one should live a clean, safe, healthy, risk-free, and aberrance-free existence. But wait a minute, isn't that the kind of life that say, robots, experience? Even the family dog has more fun; he gets to lift his leg against your favorite armchair when you are out, sleep in your still warm bed when you leave the house, and stick his face onto the dirty plates in the left-open-by-mistake dishwasher, at least. But fair enough, we watch the show, so we get preached to by the likes of Saint Matt who comes with a huge NBC endorsement, so everything he says is in line with corporate messaging. 

Move on a few hours, onto evening programming, and the dreaded reality TV genre. Wait a second, isn't this almost the polar opposite of everything we were lectured on, earlier? Suddenly bullying is back in fashion? Hate is a lovely four letter word? Racism is now in? Violence and the threat of it are so good for ratings, that this is approved of also? Jealousy now sanctioned as perfectly healthy entertainment? Disdain of beautiful people because you happen to be ugly, inside and out, is seen as something to focus on, up close and personal with a camera? I could go on, and on. And on. I am not even amalgamating a variety of TV shows either: all of the above can be seen weekly on this season of NBC's Apprentice. Don't get me wrong, people, I am a solid admirer of my man, The Trumpster, but there has been more sheer ugliness in humanoid form this season, than I can remember being acceptable previously. The behavior of one so-called "star" in particular has been so high school, so ugly, so jealous, so bullying and so over-the-top macho  that she should have been yanked. But no, ratings are King, and because it's reality TV we can get away with it, sanction it, wash our hands of it, and say, we don't approve of such behavior, but it's reality TV, nothing we can do!   

But isn't that the whole point? It's reality TV, just like real life is reality. The very fact that it is, theoretically, "reality" and kids in particular watch it, is a total double standard. "Yes, we know, that at 7am or so we like to be sanctimonious and preach to you all about the rights and wrongs in life, on our news magazine shows, but then we say that once you have done a good day's work, and it's then 7pm, well, that is time to let the pigeons loose and go express all that pent up anger, frustration, hate, jealousy and the need to hurt others, verbally or physically, or ideally, both. 

It always comes back to that lovely, nasty five letter word. M-o-n-e-y. The real message? When it comes to ratings (i.e. money), the TV stations would put on starvation in Africa as a reality show, if their research teams told them that it is the next big thing, and a rival channel was already working on a new show. Human behavior is always changed by lots of cold, hard cash, and the sanctimonious TV networks are no different, or in fact, are the best (worst) example. - Kevin Mc & Cristina

Big politics and late night talk show folly?

Should POTUS really be seen on late night talk shows, playing roles in gags, pandering to the younger voter segment, and almost exclusively doing so during an election period? It's so transparently fake, so transparently an attempt to look hip and cool, and I personally feel that it devalues both the brand of the P and of the very office itself. POTUS should have way, way more important things on his mind than fooling around on some late night lightweight candy shop such as Fallon: it is not the right place for any so-called leader of the free world. Go onto a hardcore political warfare show, if one must, where one will be put through one's paces and made to answer some real questions? God, no. Let's go on The View, where I will be screamed at the second I come out from behind the curtains, and where I will have a wonderfully sycophantic sofa on both sides of me. A bunch of sycophantic women hosts and the secret service, both adoring/protecting me; now that's fun! Yes, yes, we know that ol' Elisabeth is unlikely to be such a sycophant over a Democratic candidate, but no one cares what she thinks anyway, it seems. 

The populus does not care about the fancy suits, the many holiday photos, the tales about the White House dog or how, unbelievably, the wife buys some dresses at stores where the unemployed can also be found, looking for cheap groceries. Nope. It is almost insulting to their situation, to apparently assume that a bright smile and some gags or cute comments between POTUS and our Babs, will soothe the hurt and make them vote favorably once again. The mid-terms in 2010 should have sent shock waves through the party itself, indicating that the populus is way smarter than given credit for: they took away a supermajority from right under the party's feet, inside a mere two years. A clear indication that people were hurting, they wouldn't be fooled a second time by image over content, and were going to turn out and vote to prove it. On this watch, the loss of Ted Kennedy's seat in the Democratic fortress that was Massachusetts was unthinkable, but it happened, and it said it all.

Roll the sleeves up. Stay off glamorous TV shows filled with candyfloss. Solve some real problems. Fire some ass. In the secret service itself, maybe?! Hire more competent ass. Flamethrower the big banks and financial institutions that were bent over to, by the country's very own TARP-covered ass.  Get the economy truly back on track, without playing with unemployment numbers and other stats. Create truckloads of new jobs and businesses. Put people back to work. Give them their lives back. The lives that were stolen from them. That is what matters.

Then? Well, guess what? Then it is time to maybe, say, hmm, do a few late night or daytime talk shows!! It's way more fun basking in the glory of achievement, not image, and seeing that the sycophancy is based upon what one might have actually done for people, not what one promised to do for them recently but knowing  deep down that one couldn't deliver. The very fact that this election is shaping up to be tight, with a less than inspiring Rep candidate who should have been easily swept aside is indication in and of itself that things did not go anywhere close to projected in the bold promises of 2008/9. 

"If we do not turn this around, by 2012, then we are talking about a 1-term proposition. Clearly."  Famous last words. - Kevin Mc

Content with your content?

It's maybe a human thing to always want the magic pill that makes us younger, lighter, healthier, fitter, more handsome, more beautiful, etc. etc. Faced with a choice between lifestyle change, doing things we don't like doing, stopping things we do like doing, and thus having to face some real work and pain, we would prefer to pop the magic pill. But as anyone over 30 must have realized, for almost all of us, there is no such thing as the magic pill. 

For many in business, after resistance to it for as long as possible, social media suddenly appeared to be the magic pill. They could be used as the weapons of the newly fashionable "inbound marketing", relegating stodgy old outbound marketing to the history books, or at least to the old-fashioned (i.e. old) gang. It looks so easy! Write up a shopping list and go to your marketing people and IT department and demand some cute little icons, as the law dictates! I want a Facebook icon, that nice dark blue one, yeah, and pick me up a Twitter bird, and why not a cool YouTube video bar for good measure, too? Oh, and you're not done yet young man, why does this company not have a blog? Set me one up, and have if full and fully functional by this afternoon, if you want to stick around here, okay?!

There we go. All nicely up-to-date, with some fancy social schmocial icon birdy things on my site, and now I can sleep at night again. What does not seem to have been explained or assimilated by some (many?) is that the icons in and of themselves can be totally meaningless. A bit like having a menu on the door of a restaurant but when you look inside, you see that the place is empty, or worse, the fridge is. People ain't dumb. They stick their noses in, see that nothing is going on and they don't even like the smell, and they move on. You can add the icons, you can appear to look trendy, you can open an account on this or that, but if you are not going to focus on content then what is the point? Social media engagement feeds on quality content. Just like the Google spiders. Having the account with boring, smelly old content is worse in my opinion than having no account at all.

One of the things that makes me smile, and often, is the additional fall-out from those who suddenly paste on the cute little icons like a new silk tie on an old frayed suit. Some, it seems, think that this is carte blanche to do nothing new with their website content, or to even let it slide, because they have a Facebook page now. Some little chit-chat and photo posts on FB will distract people from the fact that our website is crap and hasn't seen new fresh content since Moby Dick was a sardine. Okay, that's exaggerating perhaps, but maybe since their last new car. Content is always King, and all the social media (which also need feeding content) will only carry you so far, if your website content is average or crap. The rule is simple: social media are all designed to drive traffic to your website, and if your website hasn't been working of late, driving more traffic to it is not going to do much of anything for you. It's like a line of cars backed up on a bridge, and none of them knowing there's a dead-end at the other side. Going nowhere, and fast. It is even preferable to be present on what might appear to be have been a self-made website (EU, for example!) but which is inviting, warm even, and stuffed full of interesting content, rather than the oft-seen current trend in minimalistic (i.e. bland) and unengaging mosaics. I always ask myself: is it minimalistic due to who was hired to do it, or the personal zen tastes of the owner, or is it really because he/she has got little to say and no key content to provide?
Your website will always remain your flagship for focus and key content, and it is mandatory to keep it top level so that the various other media actually can do their jobs, and work for you. Social media are your cars, driving passengers towards you, and your (website) content is the fuel on which they continue to run to you. 

Unless real effort is put into restoration and construction of highly engaging, conversation-making, traffic-driving, subject matter-relevant quality content? Social media will do little for you. Driving people to your door who then don't like what they see and barely come inside, is like driving in a circle around the lake for the business owner: you end up precisely where you began. And you lost some time. Quality content cannot be whisked out of the air like magic. It needs to be worked on, and if you are someone who simply cannot generate great content for your own business, well that's saying something right there, but if it's the case, then find someone who can and quickly. Time is of the essence, and business waits for no one. The time is now. Get with the new breed, or step off. For those willing to commit to real quality content, instead of bland, vague, pompous sounding mission statements or functions, the rewards can be very rewarding indeed. - Kevin Mc

Un-reality TV and its "celebrities"

It might sound like a funny thing to say, but you know, there's a big part of me that would love to go back to a time when television had only five or six main channels, and the quality remained very high in terms of both drama and comedy. On nights when there was nothing that one loved, one went and got lost at the cinema, or better still, turned the TV off, and get similarly lost in a great book. But today there are so many channels, that the great filler has become a staple part of our daily diet: reality TV. The genre is already so saturated that I find myself begging for something/anything else, than yet another reality show with yet another B-list celebrity whose best days are behind them. Or worse still, yet another reality show about a total non-celebrity who is only known due to some previous reality show! In Lindsay Lohan's case, she doesn't even have a reality show, but then again, it seems like her entire life is one! If one presumes that it is mainly the younger segment who drive trends in TV programming, we have something to be concerned about. When did young people start to lose interest in being outside playing a sport with friends, or building something, or watching real entertainment with a story and multifaceted characters, and God forbid, maybe even something of educational worth thrown in? Why would young people want to see some reality show about the Kardashians, total non-celebrities one and all, or Tori Spelling, or Jennie Garth or whomever? One would have thought that the Kim Kardashian wedding fiasco alone, would have been enough to inform people that it is all drivel, moneyed nonsense, and the equivalent of what they stick inside sausages to bulk them up. The TV equivalent of pink slime, even, and that has been making the news recently also! 

Our youth seem to be more fascinated than ever with the daily, meaningless yet glamorous lives of "famous" people, even those who actually appear to possess very little discernible talent for anything. They just happened to be born rich. Is it that we all have so much more access to those lifestyles due to how television is now saturated with them, or is it that we are more obsessed with the cult of celebrity than in earlier times? We need to be the stars of our own reality shows, by turning off the TV and going out and living it at least more of the time. We can all make our own lives more meaningful by working on improving our own situations, or spending more time on real arts, rather than watching various has-beens or wannabes heading to the nail salon, counting their money, or fighting like wildcats in some public place. Don't get me wrong, when there is something to learn, or the show is about real people being the stars in their own very tough but rather unique lives, I am totally supportive of reality TV. Just give me Deadliest Catch, Storage Wars, Hell's Kitchen or Dragon's Den. Okay then, fine, I will also admit to a certain love for American Hoggers, and the adventures of Jerry Campbell and his family: "them hawgs are downright evil!" Jerry has been "huntin' hawgs since Moby Dick was a sardine!" LOL

Everything has its place. I think we just need to keep an eye on what our kids are being taught by a lot of the trash on TV, and we need to continue to educate them on the value of curling up on the sofa with a good book, instead, sometimes. Ah, now don't get me started on books......... ;)   Cristina

Does SEO mean Screwing Endless Others?

Let's have a little chat about a "nasty" three letter acronym that we hear so much of currently. Yep, you got it, the oft-dreaded S-E-O. Everyone probably knows today that it stands for search engine optimization, but less are perhaps aware that webmasters began optimizing content specifically for search engines back in the mid-90's. So it has been around for a while. But it's very fashionable right now, and when you admit to others over lunch that you have never formally introduced SEO-type tuning to your website, you will invariably get a concerned look and a slap on the wrist from one person or other. He or she almost invariably being a marketer or so-called web design guru, in some agency or other. You end the lunch feeling convinced (or pressured) that you have no choice but to shell out at least $5-10K to upgrade yourself or your business will die. 

Like a lot of things in life, people are often sold on the idea of needing to hire someone to solve a problem. Especially when that problem presents itself via Darth Vader-like doom and gloom acronyms such as SEO and RSS and XML and so on. We have to be a little more adventurous in attempting to understand what they really mean, and not be fooled by those who use them as actual money makers for their business, not yours! Even as someone not that comfortable with web design and content management, you can do a great deal of SEO-type fine tuning on your own, at zero cost. It's all about helping the search engines do their job, and well. If you take even an afternoon and tweak (or add) your metadata, results can be achieved. Play with the various attributes so that you feel the data really describes your pages and site well, and honestly, so that they will be nicely indexed by search engines. One doesn't need to learn all about algorithms, for example, to be able to improve your site's performance. Additionally, guess what? In many cases, one does not even have to agonize too much at all over such technical issues, because as always, people, it's always about the content! The part of the black box that you don't hear so much hue and cry about, due to the fact that it should be done for free. You know who you are, you know what your business is, and what you are selling, so no one should be better than yourself in writing great web content that has a respectable density of well chosen keywords, nicely (and naturally) sprinkled throughout the website. One does not want to overdo the keyword density, but my general rule is that if it all reads quite beautifully and you don't find yourself reading the same buzzwords over and over, then you are closing in. It's also a myth that you must be the first result on a Google search page, or you will die. If you do a lot of the work yourself, and you are showing up on the first page of results, you are doing well. We here at EU went from being totally unranked, to coming up as the first 7 or 8 results on a Google search for us, all down to doing things ourselves. With a constant eye towards and endless commitment to: content. A little killer content goes a long way to feeding those lovely spiders a deliciously nourishing bite, for which they reward you handsomely. 

One has no need to be herded around like sheep, by people who want to make money out of you. If you are in a large organization, fine, go ahead, use that budget and get others to do a full tune-up of your web presence. If cash is tight, it's even more reason to adopt a learning curve approach, and do the more straightforward tweaking yourself. The thing that is most hilarious to us is the wealth of peddlers out there who cry about how urgent your need is for SEO, social media, marketing software, and yet they themselves don't practice what they preach. Beware of this species. Would you go to have your wisdom teeth yanked out by a dentist who is a huge supporter of doing so for his patients, but his wife told a friend of yours that he still has his own? Would you go to a pharmacist to take the magic pill for youth and anti-aging, but they don't really know what's in it, or how it works, and they resist taking it themselves? Pay a company to design a new logo for you, and you don't even like their own branding logo? It's ridiculous! If you do decide to go the consultant or agency route, it's super easy to find out how competent or experienced they are at using the precise service(s) they are trying to sell you. Search for them on the web! Go see their website! In 5-10 minutes flat, you will see how good their SEO is or isn't, and how 2012 their content and social presence are. If you are being pushed to let them organize your FB page, set your business up on Twitter, and even create a blog, yet there are zero interactive social icons on their site, and a blog that hasn't seen a new post since Oprah's last show? Delete. Move on. Don't spend a penny of your hard-earned money. 

When it comes to a lot of this, we have an extremely useful resource at most of our fingertips. The whole idea of a big company spending stupid money to set their CEO up on FB and Twits and making a blog is just laughable. It can be done while asleep, almost. For those who want to do it, faster, cheaper and better than with many so-called gurus? It's in your own homes, people! The kids! Teenagers today grew up with all of this, were almost breastfed on it, and they can set up and do very cool things for all your needs. Okay, it might cost you a new laptop or a flatscreen for their bedrooms, but that's a real bargain, right?! Get the basics done for you in no time, and then play with the various tools to make them work for you.

Just remember, people. Web design, content management and social media are not brain surgery, nor some massively intellectual affair. It's effectively all about "communication": a basic skill that we humans all have, and use everyday. If you don't hire people to write letters for you, or do emails, take telephone calls, or write reports for your work? Then you shouldn't need anyone to do your basic marketing. Of course, I am in general referring to smaller business and people building personal brands, and it's an entirely different thing for a Toyota or Air Canada. But we can all be better at communicating and marketing ourselves, without spending thousands of dollars that feel way, way better sitting under the pillow at night. - Kevin Mc & Cristina

Whither social media?

Social media, the darlings of the new world? Perchance, but it's not that simple. For sure, inter-personal communication, or even communication with the void, has never been easier. Millions of people can interact with both friends and "friends", sitting alone in their bedrooms, never having to leave the house to remain "connected". Of course, the most natural use of social media (SM) is to both remain connected using them, when out of town, or extremely busy, but then also interacting in a non-virtual sense on a regular basis. If they replace direct contact and interaction between real humans, then they serve to actually make isolation totally functional. One can stay home, on the computer or other device, all weekend, chatting or texting or updating, not even bothering to shower and dress, but stay completely up to date and in touch with many. SM as the perfect facilitator of unsociable behavior. Today, even among people being sociable, at dinner, or in bars, it is totally common to see a table of six friends or colleagues, with three of them buried in a device, and one rising from the table, "I'll be right back, I just have to take this call". The one person at the table who doesn't have a smartphone or unbelievably turns it off during social occasions, sits alone, staring at other tables. Do SM by default make us less sociable? That text or email or call just has to be more important than the person we met for drinks or dinner, right?

The most interesting development has been the pervasive entry of SM into the world of business. Initially, anyone over 35-40 could ignore the whole thing, as chatting and texting and Facebooking etc. were all in the domain of youth. "It's what my kids do, not me!" But as people began to realize that SM were in fact an ideal tool in the marketing canon of various businesses, tremors began to shake the offices of almost all senior executives, globally. All of a sudden, the kids had a skill set and toolbox that Daddy and Mommy needed, but were scared to death of having to open and use. To cut a long story short, some got with the picture, some didn't, and we are where we are today. SM have changed the way we do business, and by and large it's for the better. The business version of the unsociable bedsitter hiding out at home works much better. It's called inbound marketing, and one can get great traffic and results by "sitting at home" and driving people towards you and your products. All while sitting unwashed in your underwear. It's a dream come true, people! Isn't it?

One of the major purported benefits of SM is that they permit those who are awkward or inefficient communicators to suddenly join the conversation and interact with their audience. I don't actually think that this is strictly true. In my opinion, you can't be useless at dealing with people in person, but you are a brilliant SM user. It's still about communication and engagement, and you aren't going to turn a 52 year old who has never dealt with the people part of their business, and doesn't care, into a brilliant communicator and marketer. You can spot a malingerer, miles away. They have a LinkedIn account, with no picture, and no detailed description, the FB page has not seen a new entry in a month, and they started a blog two years ago, and there has been nothing new posted for 8 months. But they do have the latest high end smartphone. It's all about the image, not the function or content. Right? Wrong! I don'see any point in shelling out hundreds of bucks on a superphone on which you primarily are going to use the one old-fashioned function that your old dinosaur did faithfully, and cheaper. Yes, you sit down in the five-star restaurant and place your supertool onto the table, as gasps are heard at adjacent tables. "Oh my God, he has the new Monsterphone, this one can even give you an electric shock as part of your diary, so you are never late for a meeting!" Calm down people, he either doesn't know that function even exists, all those icons and apps are so much work, or it was never turned on; and yes, he's still late for meetings.  It's image, not function! 

Either one has to commit to "going back to school" and rewiring the way we do business and communicating our distinguishing features and products, or get someone who is better at it to do so. Worse still, don't appear to utilize all the latest bells and whistles, for image sake, but then do so badly. In general, seeing a FB page or Blog that has had no entry for many months, actually ages the image of a company incredibly, having the opposite effect than desired, amazingly enough. It makes them feel ancient somehow. One concludes that some executive banged the table demanding he/she had their own FB page and Blog and website, but then didn't have the stamina or enthusiasm to carry it through. These are not inert, static facades for a business, but are meant to be very dynamic aspects of a company's corporate message and marketing. In many ways, if you don't want to do it, and aren't going to do it well, or with any real passion, then don't bother; you can end up looking worse than if you had no SM at all. If you are truly old school, and prefer the meet'n'greets, the lunches, the conferences, the phone calls, and so on, go ahead, if it works for you. Doing things which take time and resources away from pursuits that are paying off is perhaps not the best way to go. We are all free to choose, as long as we choose smartly in a way that brings results for us. 

Like all (potentially addictive) things in life, SM have both their good points and their other points, the latter of which could use some careful analysis and consideration before entering into the fray. Nevertheless, they do represent a major step forward for business, in particular, and as long as we do remember what the "S" stands for, and incorporate real contact and interaction with other humans as part of the equation, then we might just be able to have our cake and eat it as well. - Kevin Mc   

Gotta have writers!

There's something about writers that fascinates me, not least as many are so good not just at the fine art of writing well, in a mechanical sense, but also that they are able to express occasionally vague thoughts or emotions or moods in a way that I can't! Story or plot is one thing, but I love when a writer says something that I probably have felt or now agree with, even if I did not think of it in that way before. An ability to articulate actual "life" itself into meaningful words that are readily readable is a gift, and one that I am often in awe of. Hence my delight in having Kevin Mc on EU. Supporting a writer as he/she nucleates a new book, digging deep in the writing phase, and seeing them through the entire process to a finished product feels so "right". As in the right thing to do. It is often a thankless and apparently lonely pursuit and challenge, to write, but it's a task that has a remarkable outcome for the individual: a new book! In life one is supposed to choose one's battles, and so EU has chosen to support and promote Kevin Mc, who we feel has got potential greatness in his words, and who simply must be exposed to a wider audience. That's it and that's all. It's just the right thing for me to do, this wonderful adventure that is EU! - Cristina

Facebook rules?!

Unquestionably, Facebook has changed lives and changed the world we live in. No one is going to argue with that so I don't need to discuss the reasons why. They are the perfect example of how a very cool idea can be transformed into a gigantic brand; one that it is almost impossible not to have heard of if you are alive today. Where we feel that Facebook (FB) falls short is in "customer" service and relations. Initially one could have argued that members were not truly customers, as it was all free and no one was buying anything from them, but we all realize that is a very weak argument, right? Even while not spending anything, the hundreds of millions who were signing up and joining the conversation were also actively if not consciously promoting the FB brand, and represent a key target for advertisers and their substantial revenue. Additionally, teenagers who grew up with FB will generally continue to use it as their life diary, once they have become successful individuals in various areas of business, when they have more money to spend and maybe even have their own business to promote. So, of course it's about the money! When you have got memberships of the order of a billion people, big money comes knocking. 

What seems distasteful is the autocratic way in which FB makes major changes to client privacy issues, and the sharing of private information, as well as major format changes for hundreds of millions of people who are satisfied with the way things are. Business pages, for example, were recently informed that they were switching to the new Timeline format, whether they wanted to or not, on March 31st, 2012. We were truly shocked by this move, as a business who is an advertising revenue source for FB, and yet our opinion was irrelevant and no option was given to choose between our old format or the new. While Timeline might fit the weekly life of an active teenager, we do not feel it is of the same use to a business page. On top of this, recently, FB changed the amount of text one can insert into ads, out of the blue, with no warning. At first we assumed it was a glitch, but when then opting to use an old tried and trusted ad, it would not work. Suddenly we went from text message length down to only 90 characters permitted. This decision was crazy, not least as it completely obviates what they even recommend to advertisers: try many formats, and when you get it right and it works, use that ad. Now? You can't use the ad that you designed and paid for, in its original format, anymore. How come there is not a corresponding reduction in price for the 90 character ad versus the 140 character ad?!

It is probably a simple reflection of the fact that the head of the organization, while being a visionary, is not known for managing or caring about the expectations of his clients, even the business clients who truly are customers of FB. Additionally, it is indicative of someone who did not go through the training process one passes through in large, professional companies where one is educated (or is supposed to be) in customer relations as part of alignment with corporate branding. He got his success too young to have received such training, but he sure can afford to take a few courses, and/or bring in some serious talent to make the entire FB "experience" feel not only a little more personal, even for business, but to actually do what is the whole purpose of FB: engagement of people, joining the conversation, and actually listening to it, and appearing to care about what your customers like and don't like. Not just informing them, like the school headmaster, that this is how it's going to be, end of story.

I suppose that with almost a billion customers one can afford to be a bit arrogant about "them", and just assume that you know what's best for "them" and "they" can get on with it? While FB sure isn't losing clients en masse, I still think it's a dangerous approach and one that should not be seen as typical of the corporate brand that is Facebook. - Kevin Mc

Social media and personal brand building

As more and more people turn to self-publishing, there has been a correlative rise in the number of (largely) self-appointed "gurus"who offer their services or wisdom to help the uninitiated navigate the horrendous ravines of social media. God knows you can't possibly become an inbound marketer without social media, and God knows they are such a complex affair, y'all need some serious help. Right? Wrong! We here at EU feel that the basics of social media are rather common sense or intuitive, and in many ways, the tools are still relatively new enough that there are no true "rules" to be educated on. Read the "help" and "how to" sections and you are already off to a flying start. Guess what? You might make some small mistakes, but you are not Apple or Google; there is no furious CEO coming to your office. Learn, do not repeat mistakes, and move on. Get a feel for each tool, whether Facebook page, Twitter or Blog. You can readily measure the success or failure of each promotional post or attempt to draw in new followers, tweak your approach, and keep getting better. 

Rome was not built in a day, and neither are brands. As much as one gets turned on by stories of (apparent) overnight success of a book and personal brand, it is the exception not the rule. So ignore all those people bleating (not tweeting) at you about how to get a thousand new followers in a week, blah blah. EU has no intention of joining that gang: people who look very impressive in their number of followers, 10,000 or so, but when you look at how many they follow, it is 11,089. To us, it is meaningless and of little-to-no significance whatsoever. We would prefer 100 quality, engaged fans or followers than tens of thousands of so-called churners. If you had the necessary skills and persistence to write your own book, you have what it takes to take on social media and use them successfully. You don't need to create a fake following. 

Building of a personal brand takes time, and patience is required. We are in it for the long haul, and will go at it sure and steady, with our eyes focused on the bigger picture and the long term. Instant success is great, but it can be shakier than a brand built on rock solid foundations that were laid down over centuries. Ahem, okay, maybe not centuries, but it sure feels like it sometimes! ;) Have a great Spring Wednesday! - Cristina & Kevin Mc

Self-publish, or perish!

Lots of new and self-published authors making the news recently. In the last two days, both E.L. James and Shadonna Richards on TV interviews describing their particular route to success. They are the authors of Fifty Shades of Grey and An Unexpected Bride, respectively: two books that are selling up a storm despite the absence of a major traditional publishing house. Of course, one must remember that for every such success we do hear about, there are so many thousands more that don't make it, but still, it is most encouraging to see new authors strike out on their own - usually after hundreds of agent and publisher rejections. 

Now of course, the key question is: are such books rejected because the agent or publisher does see the potential in the book, and the money it could make, but not the fit with their particular brand? Or, are they rejected because of a lack of insight or vision or being put off by the cover and/or genre or having read only the first 10-20 pages? At Evergreen Umbrella, we think it is the latter, not least because any agent or publisher who sees dollar signs is never going to walk away from them. Yes, we can hear the bleating that books are a very subjective affair and that one man's (or woman's!) meat is another's murder, but when we are talking about a piece of work that has seen 100 or more rejections suddenly selling millions of copies? J.K. Rowling. Kathryn Stockett. Amanda Hocking. Shadonna Richards. E.L. James. Women, one and all. A coincidence perhaps, and surely just a few well known examples, among many others. 

Another question is whether one should even bother with an agent, anymore? They appear to be a dying breed, or one only relevant to already established literary stars. Ditto the actual publishing houses, who are in more or less the same position, precariously sitting on the thin fence between the old and the new. While the new continues to encroach on their territory and eat away at their revenues, sending them running scared into the memories of the good old (i.e. bad old) days. 

Those are my thoughts this morning, and I would love to hear comments from anyone who would like to respond. We can be found at www.evergreenumbrella.com and on our FB page. In the meantime, I wish everyone a great afternoon! - Kevin Mc

The EU Blog i s online!

Here we are, finally! EU was born in early February, 2012, and we have been busy coming up with our new logo, our own website (www.evergreenumbrella.com), establishing my presence on Twitter (@Cristology), and building a fan page on Facebook (www.facebook.com/evergreenumbrella). Things have moved really fast indeed, and it was thus time to set up a blog for EU where I can get to both join the conversation and invite others in for a cup of tea from time to time. Here we go, EU!

The first writer and resident artist on EU is our very own Kevin Mc, all the way from Ireland, whose "A Quiet Resignation" e-book is out now, and available on our website. I will be dropping in here with various posts regarding his great first novel, as well as with more general comments about things I am reading or hearing about, particularly to do with books and the self-publishing phenomenon.. The adventure is only beginning, and we look forward to conversing with many of you via our various social media portals. We can't wait! - Cristina