My Own Public World

Trackbacks

2007-02-01T09:47:00.000Z

It's been quite a while since I last posted: a combination of moving house, a longer commute to work and the arrival of our first child - surely the most thrilling experience in the world, spending time just staring at Isaac is more appealing than logging on to the blog.

But a colleague has asked me to check that the trackbacks on his blog are working so, with any luck, here's a trackback to Nigel Hollis' latest post, this time on buzz marketing ...

Doh! It doesn't seem to work. I'll have another go later and we'll see if we can fix it. In the meantime, here's a link anyway ... Nigel on Buzz Marketing.

update ... here's a trackback to Nigel ...

http://www.mb-blog.com/index.php/2007/02/16/better-known-or-better-liked/trackback/

Diet Coke and Mentos experiment

2006-07-24T12:52:00.000Z

In response to a bit of banter on the Millward Brown blog, I was stimulated to have a go at creating my own minor replica of the Eepybird Diet Coke and Mentos experiment.

I did capture my contribution to science on film, but can only upload a picture here.

It's soooo much fun. Go on, have a go yourself ...

Too little time to write

2006-05-15T21:10:00.000Z

I've been moving house recently, so I've not had time to post for a while. And I don't really have time to write properly here either.

But I did want to draw some attention to some really interesting debate that's been going on at the Millward Brown blog (remeber, that's who I work for).

Nigel started the debate with a post called 'great idea, wrong brand' about the Chevy Tahoe campaign. This stimulated some responses, not least from Max Kalehoff (of BuzzMetrics) and a further post from Nigel which he called 'a luddite at sea' in a way that quite dismisses the depth of commentary.

A couple of more recent posts also touch on word of mouth and consumer generate media:

It's all really good discussion, and I wish I had time to provide some more insightful commentary and contribution. One thing that does strike me is the amount of heat that enters the discussion from time to time, and particularly when someone expresses an opinion that is less than entirely enthusiastic about the power of online and connected media. It's almost as though you have to be explicit that you see the "massive potential, but ..." in order to have your point of view taken seriously. To my mind, all these new media are just that, new media that should be evaluated in order to assess their potential in meeting a particular communications objective. The media itself only has a value in so far as it can help you get what you want from it; and that's the same for TV and newpapers and online.

The power of old media

2006-04-26T12:42:00.000Z

There have been a couple of really interesting posts about effective campaigns of different kinds on Nigel Hollis' blog in the last week or so.

The first piece is a great example of a campaign in traditional media (largely TV) that has had a huge effect on public awareness and conversation about the dangers of meth. The campaign is for the Montana Meth Project. One of the interesting things about the campaign is the way it uses traditional TV advertising to deliver the message, but also making use of new-media to allow people to view the whole campaign online, download the ads and send them on to other people.

The campaign is a great example of picking the right media to deliver an impactful, and important message. The campaign has had a significant impact on the awareness of the dangers of meth, increased the level of disapproval of meth, and driven people to have more conversations about the risks of trying it even once. All backed by research by Millward Brown.

The success of the campaign in stimulating conversation got me to thinking about the opportunity to look to the social sector for ideas about driving and supporting consumer conversation. Sure the public sector doesn't have to develop distinct brand identities, and drugs, drink-driving, AIDS and the like give loads of scope to grab attention with pretty eye catching (if scary) ideas, but a key objective of these kinds of campaigns has always been to get people talking about the issues. I'd be fascinated to know how these campaigns have built mechanisms to support and prolong the conversations they stimulate. PR has clearly had a role, but so have community action programmes and other kinds of ground level activity.

I wonder if there are lessons to be learned for commercial word of mouth?

Beyond the fact that there are far more important messages to get people engaged with than commercial ones, the overarching thought that the success of Montana Meth leaves me with is that picking the best media (note the plural!) for the task at hand is the key thing.

In many cases, TV-style advertising still offers the best opportunity to present the idea that is at the heart of your message. There are certainly other means to get the message across, extend its reach, build its resonance and ad longevity, but TV-type copy gives the chance to present a big idea to large numbers of people. Sometimes, that's what a campaign (or brand) needs: the chance to present its big idea. Punters can then react to it, decide whether or not it's credible given the brand's delivery, what they need from the category, fits with their ethical point of view, grabs their attention and makes them love the brand.

I don't believe you can always start with a conversation, sometimes a brand needs to give people something to talk about. But yes, they should also be given the opportunity to toss the idea around, and engage with it (whether positively or negatively).

Exploring the potential of consumer conversation in planning the campaigns in the first place, now that's another story ...

Freakonomics and the working families tax credit

2006-04-17T18:31:00.000Z

My regular reader will know that I'm a huge fan of Freakonomics.

So it will come as no surprise that I was interested in an article in Saturday's Guardian about how the working families tax credit has created sufficient economic incentives for 100,000 people in the UK to get into relationships. It's based on a piece of research by the Royal Holloway College. The logic is pretty simple: for women on the minimum wage, their relationship status can gain them, or cost them £50-100 a week, and that this influences their probability of getting into, or staying in, relationships. The influence is pretty small (it accounts for a 0.5% rise in the rate of relationships), but it plays a part.

It's a good example of how economic incentives shape society in quite subtle ways. I hope Levitt and Dubner spot the article.

What will succeed on the web?

2006-04-17T17:52:00.000Z

There's an interesting post on Naked Conversations about the ever-increasing quantity of great web tools available these days. One of Shel Holtz's points is that a lot of people are developing really clever, useful tools that will ultimately, and through no fault of their own, fail to find a market and make their developers any money.

I have no idea how things will work out for these clever, and committed people, but a couple of thoughts come to mind:

One of the merits of modern web (2.0) technologies is that it can be relatively quick to develop new tools and cheap bring them to market. This means that you may not need to sell very many in order to make money. Maybe not a load of money, but some.
This is made even more powerful by the fact that these tools will probably be able to work together (and quite likely to do different jobs), there's unlikely to be beed to choose a format and then be limited to the tools you can plug into it. And so some bigger companies will probably buy some of the smaller ones and offer a range of web tools.

I'm also interested by the notion of how much time ordinary have available to work out what all these new toys do, and choose what they need. As long as the internet enables people to do the things that are really important to them faster, more easily then they will continue to make use of the good stuff available. But as soon as it starts getting more difficult they will stop.

There is a benefit in simplicity. Ease of use of is an important part of the success of much consumer technology. Personally, as soon as I spend more time trying to do things on the internet in virtual space than I spend doing the things that are important to me in the real world, I'll stop spending as much time online. I'm sure that the same kind of rule applies in the business world as well - I'll only use the stuff that actually helps me to get the job done.

So my one prediction is that the the tools that will succeed are the ones that manage to acheive a level of simplicity that allows them to capture just enough time from people to understand how useful they are. To quote Einstein, "everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."

MS Ipod Parody - Google Video

2006-04-08T11:38:00.000Z

There's been a lot in the news of late about Apple and Microsoft, what with the news that Apple about now making it possible to load Windows XP on their hardware, via something called Boot Camp.

And everyone seems to think take it as read that Apple and Microsoft really are like chalk and cheese. But while their methods may be different, surely they both just have a real passion for connecting people with the possibilities that their technology opens up. We shouldn't knock either of them for that.

Just see how positive Robert Scoble is about Apple's ability to respond to the blogging community.

So I thought I'd track down a viral clip that I've been hearing about for ages - the spoofed MS version of the iPod packaging. Fantastic! A bt of light weekend relief.

Blog (n)Etiquette

2006-04-06T19:50:00.000Z

I was chatting to colleague earlier this week about the etiquette of blogging. He's even newer to this game than I am, and wasn't sure of the accepted behaviour. So I tried to offer some advice, but got to thinking that I really just make it up as I go along too. And then I thought I'd have a browse on the old interweb for some (n)etiquette. But how hard was it to find anything coherent??!!

So far, nothing new: "Shock! Man struggles to find exactly what he needs on the internet."

But then I started reading the posts, and the real reason that there's no easy-to-find code of how to behave in blogland started to become apparent. It's because different types of blog demand different rules - it's almost like the real world! What might be apropriate on one blog is completely out of order in another community. It's a skill on the part of the reader to pick up the tone of what is and isn't appropriate, and to read, comment and reply accordlingly.

Like any other area where freedom of speech is sacred, we have to work out when to keep our mouths shut.

So, my favourite blog etiquette posts ...

I did quite like cafemama. Ordinarily, it's not my kind of place, but the post started out with exactly the same premise as mine, so I was drawn to it.
rocksinmydryer is another "mum's" (or "mom's") blog with a post on netiquette, with loads of readers' comments. But both of these are very much personal life-style sites.
So then I came to talkturkey, which pointed me to my favourite post on the subject of blogging etiquette. Why do I like it? Because it's written with a real sense of personal style - you might not like it, but at least it stimulates a reaction.

And I guess I should probably sign off with a couple of my tips for righteous behaviour in the blogsphere. Two tips:

Reference your sources - surely the real joy of the internet as a social medium is that it's all joined up. It can be irritating as hell, but following a stream of conciousness through several links and not being able to remember who you got to where you arrived is the road to serendipity.
And express your personality: have an opinion; have something to say; write as if you mean it.

How do people find the time to blog?

2006-04-02T19:47:00.000Z

My blog is now about 6-weeks old, and this will be the 19th post. But it's hard work: hard to find the time to post, hard to think of things to talk about, and it actually takes a while to formulate an opinion (not that mine are exactly Immanuel Kant!), read a few other sites, create a few links and so on.

I can't help wondering how serious bloggers have time to hold down proper jobs, bring up their kids, do the housework (attend to their wives as well - editorial comment from Mrs G!) and have hobbies out there in the 'real world'. I'm sure I saw a similar comment on the Freakonomics blog a while ago to, but can't seem to find it right now.

So here I am sat on the sofa on Sunday night, about to watch the new Poirot and wondering where they find the time. Am I missing something? Or am I just a bit slow? It's perfectly possible.

Still homemade muffins are pretty good blogging food.

Millward Brown Blog

2006-04-02T19:02:00.000Z

The Millward Brown blog has now launched. Hooray! I've posted a couple of times in the past about corporate blogging, and how I have been hoping to persuade my company to embrace the possibilities of blogging.

Well we are now boldly in the blogsphere, in the form of a blog authored by Nigel Hollis, Executive Vice President and Chief Global Analyst at Millward Brown.

A lot of the posts so far are based around sessions from the recent Advertising Research Foundation’s annual conference, many of them touching on 'engagement marketing'. There's even a post specifically about word of mouth. The tone of Nigel's post suggests a degree of scepticism about the enthusiastic coverage of social media among the blogging community. The issue doesn't seem to be the potential of online as a WoM generator, but more about the ability of online sources to really create a connection with consumers in the same way that personal/offline sources have always done in the past.

I'm sure Nigel will be have more on the subject of WoM in future.

Corporate websites to go blog-only??

2006-03-25T20:14:00.000Z

Another interesting post from Steve (Micropersuasion) Rubel has caught my eye.

He's talking about corporates which are starting to replace their corporate websites and use blogs instead. The rationale given is that a lot of companies (and especially B2B service providers/agencies) are basically selling their people. So blogs are a great way to showcase their abilities, and (I would argue) their personalities and opinions.

Regular readers (are there any?) won't be surprised that I'm slightly sceptical about this point of view. But only slightly sceptical mind.

I think blogs are a great way for companies to showcase the talented people, and to demonstrate that they are thinking about the issues that keep (potential) clients up at night. But there are other things that they need to be saying online (and on their websites) too - like what they do, what their services are, how they work, who they work with, what their CSR credentials are and so on.

I recently played a small part in helping Millward Brown to set up a blog. It's launched, but only internally at the moment. Hopefully it will be live in the public domain soon (once a few hitches are ironed out).

So I believe that there with be a merging of blogs with 'static' corporate sites. Let's just watch it happen ...

RSS and all that jazz

2006-03-25T11:54:00.000Z

I was running a training session about WoM (measurement of) this week, and it was pretty apparent that most of our audience (UK market research professionals) didn't really know what blogs are. In each of 3 sessions, only about 3-5 people out of 40 said they used blogs, and I was the only blogger out of the lot.

We were also talking about how there are all sorts of tools available now to help people avoid ads (tivo, or Sky+ for TV, RSS feeds and simple pop-up blockers for online). Again, lots of blank faces when were were talking about RSS.

So I was interested to stumble across a post by Steve Rubel about a Forester report on the use of RSS and blogs by teens. Even in the US, only 20% of online teens regularly read blogs, and this falls to 10% of online adults. Now there's a lot of potential in that 10%, but it's still very much a minority. Only about a quarter of those online in the US have heard of RSS, and fewer than 1 in 10 are users.

An adjacent post on Micropersuasion links through to a series of pieces about how to use RSS. The series itself is at CT Biz Blogs.

Now I've been aware of RSS for a while, and do have a few feeds saved within my Firefox bookarks, but I've never felt like I'm really getting the most from RSS - it's all a bit hard work still.

So I was thrilled to get an intro to Sage on the CT Biz Blogs posting. Sage is a lightweight RSS and Atom feed reader extension for Mozilla Firefox. It's dead easy to install, and pretty straightforward to use - probably easier if you actually bother to read the instructions! And you end up with a sidebar that contains all the RSS feeds you want to subscribe to. You can set up folders and separators and all sorts of good stuff.

So a couple of explicit (product) recommendations from me today:
bookmarks. But I've need felt that I'm really getting the most from RSS. So I was thrilled to read about

I've also started using del.icio.us today. If I remember, I'll let you know how I get on with it.

Are we measuring the wrong one number?

2006-03-22T14:11:00.000Z

For a lot of people, an article called "The One Number You Need To Grow" (sadly, you have to pay for the article) by Frederick Reichheld in a 2005 edition of the Harvard Business Review has been their way in to the subject of word of mouth. There's a Parl Marsden of the LSE.

I have 2 problems with these pieces of research in this context:

Firstly, while they claim to be showing that advocacy leads to growth, both articles as far as I can tell actually relate current advocacy to past growth. There seems to be a real danger that they've got their causes and their effects the wrong way around. I'd even argue that brands that have a lot of recently acquired customers (i.e. they have grown recently) should have a lot of advocacte - people who are either reinforcing their own brand choice, or who are simply in a position of knowledge having recently evaluated the brands available.

More significantly, I'm just not sure that the kind of advocacy they suggest we measure necessarily leads to constructive, innovative, and interesting attempts to engage with consumers: creating brands and marketing that respond to their needs and capture their imagination. Customer satisfaction researchers have been arguing for years that likelihood to recommendation or buy again are better measures of customer commitment than satisfaction, so I might even present this as another example of WoM hype.

Essentially, my issue with Reichheld and Marsden et al is that they seem to argue that advocacy is an end in itself. To my mind, person-to-person recommendations are a beneficial side-effect of a positive relationship between a brand and its consumers. It's fantastic when people spontaneously endorse brands they love, but most of the time, we should be focussing on long-term brand building that fosters real engagement (mutual value), and see the advocacy as a secondary benefit.

Having read a bit more of Marsden's stuff, I think it's just not the most compelling argument for why word of mouth is important.

Here endeth the opinion for today.

Now the little guy is the true pit bull of journalism

2006-03-14T20:10:00.000Z

There's an article in the Comment section of today's Guardian by Arianna Huffington about the power of blog, specifically relating to the formation of the news and the threat that the blog space (and the web more generally I guess) poses to old fashioned media. Here's the story.

I'm interested for a couple of reasons:

Firstly, I do think that blogging has real power to shape the news in a way that is completely different to the mainstream media. People will make 'news' out of the issues they really care about by writing about them, and finding other people with common interests. This should force the fourth estate to represeent the concerns of the public more accurately - otherwise peple will turn to the blog-space instead.
I disagree about the immediacy of blogs being an advantage over traditional media. Yes, we can read stuff online that's more up to date than that in the printed media. But what newspaper these days isn't also online and constantly up to date. And even offering readers the chance to add their opinions about stories. Some newspaper sites even have blogs these days to adopt some of the same ways of sharing the creative process.

So blogs offer real people an equal footing in terms of creating media in a way that should keep the mainstream media (and others) honest, but I'm not sure I see that there are any real technological advantages that the traditional media owners can't exploit to improve what they offer to readers.

Go on ... disagree with me.

Ashley Cole as a test case

2006-03-07T21:28:00.000Z

I know, it sounds bizarre.

Ashley Cole (England footballer for any yanks out there) is suing two British newspapers for libel after they publiched articles which didn't name him, but which created a frenzy of comment online about the (homo)sexual antics of a couple of top footballers. For the story, see the Beeb.

Basically, the newspapers didn't name him, but published a blurred out photo which was subsequently shown (pretty convincingly) to have been of young Cole by an online site.

A lawyer quoted on the BBC says that the case will hinge on, "whether the newspaper should have been prepared that its story would be followed by tittle tattle on internet chatrooms and whether it is responsible for it".

It's an interesting case of new and old media meeting. There doesn't seem to have been a massive 'frenzy' of chat about the story online: Blogpulse shows a peak of 14 posts (searching for "Ashley Cole") on Feb 20th, though this then rose again to 25 posts on the day that court case was announced. From another point of view, there's little doubt that without the reach of the internet, any photo that revealed Cole as the subject of the story would never have got any significant circulation.

So, if nothing else, it's a great case of old and new media interacting to give a story more mileage than it would otherwise have had. A good example of the media talking about itself again??!!

Is word of mouth all it's cracked up to be?

2006-03-07T20:47:00.000Z

My old mate at WoM Watch has drawn my attention to an article in Forbes about WoM by Jack Trout (influential marketing author).

He takes a remarkably sceptical tone. But for all his scepticism, he doesn't deny the power of word of mouth at all. He even says that, "a third-party endorsement of your product has always been the Holy Grail." What he really seems to be railing against is the industry that's grown up around buzz, and I have some sympathy with him.

It is important, and not always easy, to try to disentangle the real new marketing philosophy from the things that were always good practice before, and the extent to which t'internet offers a genuinely new medium or just magnifies the conversations people always used to have.

For a defence against Trout's attack, see George Silverman. George mounts a spirited defence, but for all the vigorous language (from both sides), I'm not sure they're really all that far apart. It really does look like a difference in emphasis to me: both seem to agree that word of mouth as a role as part of the marketing mix.

Great defintion of the role of marketing in word of mouth

2006-03-03T18:07:00.000Z

I was browsing the WOMMA site today and came across a fantastic explanation of the of role of marketing within word of mouth. It's from a white paper written by the Phelon Group on how to measure B2B word of mouth within the IT sector.

It reads:

Note that word of mouth from a marketing perspective is not about creating word of mouth - it's the exceptional quality of a product or service that does that. Marketing cannot controls what customers (and detractors) say, nor can it create word of mouth. The goal of word of mouth marketing is three-fold:

to encourage and facilitate word of mouth by listening to customers and making them happy;
to make it easy for those happy customers to tell their colleagues; and
to make sure marketplace influencers experience the great qualities of of your company's product or service.

A better definition I have yet to see. It's not about artifice; it's about mutual benefit.

Connected Marketing

2006-03-02T21:24:00.000Z

I've recently started reading Connected Marketing. It's a collection of articles about word of mouth marketing edited by Paul Marsden and Justin Kirby. The book's website describes its subject matter as:

"The field of connected marketing is all about harnessing connectivity (the social and technological links that connect the world) and stimulating brand talk between customers, clients and consumers - tapping into that powerful marking media to drive demand and business growth."

Which seems fair enough to me.

So far, I'm only a chapter and a half in, but I will be posting some reviews when I get the time. First impressions are that the book is pleasingly easy to read, full of enthusiasm for the subject, and offers loads of case studies to really illustrate what they are talking about. My initial concern is that some of the case studies (many of which are great examples of good marketing) either might not have been conceived of as word of mouth generating, or worse, might not actually have been examples of real consumer-to-consumer comment.

More to follow ...

World book day

2006-03-02T20:38:00.000Z

Today is world book day; a day to celebrate the history's most popular medium.

Yes, word of mouth (or conversation as it might have been called then) is older, and painting on the walls of caves too. But without books we just wouldn't have been here today, whether it's Homer, the bible (or other text of your choosing), Shakespeare, da Vinci, Galilieo, Descartes, the OED, The Times or JK Rowling, civilisation just wouldn't have reached where it has without the power of the printed word.

Regardless of the power of the internet to make information available instantly, to be constantly up to date and ever changing, there's still nothing like sitting down (or curling up) with a good book and getting lost in the story or the argument.

I'm interested, possibly engouraged, that Technorati can find 588 posts about world book day. The first post on the list actually told me that World Book Day only takes place in the UK and Ireland. What a shame.

I was also reminded of the power of books and the press even today to get writers into trouble. Specifically the story of Orhan Pamuk, a best-selling Turksih novelist who was recently put on trial for writing about massacres of Armenians and Kurds in Turkey. More positively, I also stumbled across this post from a guy in the middle of reading Pamuk's "My Name is Red" and so excited about it that he can't wait to get back to it. The book is on my shelf, but yet to be started; unlike "The Kite Runner" (Khaled Hosseini) which is next on his list to read. I read this a few months ago and loved it. It's a deeply disturbing book about life in (and having left) Afghanistan at the end of the 70s, but beautifully written, and with a story that really kept me wanting to turn the page.

Books: I still love them!

Measuring ROI

2006-02-27T20:43:00.000Z

A couple of other people have stimulated me to respond to posts measuring the return on investment. For details, see:

What's the ROI of a blog?
Micro Persuasion: Blog Measurement Needs Standards on WoM Watch

In my view, it ain't an easy business - partly because there's no conventional media currency to give a measure of the initial 'investment', but also because guaging the true return is never an easy business.

Making use of blogging and other CGM means taking a longer term view of investment than simply whether or not it generates an immediate sale. So hard measures of the (usually short term) return are likely to be shortsighted. Marketing isn't the same as sales, and blog-savvy marketing isn't the same as old style 'pull-the-wool-over-their-eyes-and-see-if-they-notice' marketing.

It doesn't mean people shouldn't try to understand the impact of word of mouth and it's ilk. But I don't think it's easy.

Personalised booze!

2006-02-24T19:56:00.000Z

I can't even remeber how I stumbled across it, but I just spotted a post about a company in Canada who let you 'design' your own wine. What a fantastic idea!

I'm off to http://www.elitevintners.com/ for a look right now!

Corporate blogs

2006-02-24T19:35:00.000Z

I heard this week that the CEO of my firm (which makes it's money in marketing communications, and charges clients for measuring comment about their brands in the blogsphere) was, and possibly still is, opposed to the idea of us having a corporate blog. Astonished!

What better opportunity to get some conversation with (potential) clients?

So a quick search for blog posts about corporate blogs threw up this list of tips for corporate blogs, and this post about what a good corporate blog should do.

It really does seem like the perfect opportunity to humanise what we do and who we are, and also to engage in conversation about the issues that we address on behalf of clients. It's even a chance, dare I say it, to admit that we don't know all the answers, just to talk about the issues that keep us up at night. Jesus, we talk to our customers all the time about how important it is for them to engage with consumers!

Fingers crossed we'll change his mind.

Sustainable fishing

2006-02-24T09:00:00.000Z

Sainsbury's have announced that they will be selling certain fish from unsustainable stocks (see this article for more detail). They aren't the first big supermarket in the UK to do so, but they are (apparently) the UK biggest fishmonger.

However, there was another article in this week's press about illegally fished cod being sold in fish and chip shops across the land.

It's difficult for consumers: We're told that fish is good for us and that we should try to eat more. But many fish stocks are being fished at unsustainable levels and/or in ways that damage the rest of the marine environment. Knowing what is approriate for us to eat isn't easy.

I read a fascinating book recently called "The End of the Line" which discusses the economics and environmental history of mis-management of the world's fish stocks throughout the 20th century and beyond. The message is pretty depressing: there are sustainable, and economically successful, fisheries management regimes, but establishing the political will to commit to long-term health rather than short-term interest is generall impossible. Just think about the annual round of EU negotiations on fishing quotas.

But more positively, more and more people seem to be aware of the issue, and that's got to be the start of a change for the better. And there are more and more sources that help us to make smart choices when we fancy a fish-supper. See for example:

More WoM resources

2006-02-22T21:47:00.000Z

For a far more thoroughly researched site on the subject of WoM, including links to lots of stories on the subject, see WoM Watch.

The power of blog: all hot air?

2006-02-22T21:15:00.000Z

I'm currently spending a lot of time at work investigating the power of word of mouth (WoM) communication and its impact of brands. There's loads of material around making the case for WoM being the most powerful thing to hit marketing since John Logie Baird. For some examples, see:

Some of this is pretty serious academic work, including this influential piece from the Harvard Business Review by Frederick F. Reichheld. A lot of the rest is written by committed advocates of word of mouth marketing as a route to engagement with conusmers and brand growth/health.

But how much of it is really proven?

I absolutely believe that people talking your brand (or cause) can be a great indicator of success, a sign of real health and vibrancy. And the web in particular has massive power to propogate bad news about things (see failing enterprise, and dell hell as a fine example of what can happen when people start trying to control oline commentary).

But what's so new? Haven't people always talked about what they come across in their lives: the good and the bad; and especially the enlightening and the frustrating? The web gives people more potential to reach other people than they ever had before, and they can link it together more easily, but is this really a new case for treating consumers as grown ups, or just a reminder that we should always have done so?

Outside of us blog-o-philes, what notice does the average consumer take of all this chatter? Maybe we've just buzzed ourselves into believing we've touched on some kind of holy grail, when in fact it's just emperor's new clothes.

I'm playing the sceptic (to create a bit of balance), but let's not get too carried away.

A photo from Whistler

2006-02-21T20:03:00.000Z

I thought I'd also have a go at posting a photo. This one was taken on my mobile (an Orange SPV550) in Whistler, on the way from the slopes back to our chalet.

The phone's not bad. It runs Windows Mobile: the Contacts syncs with Outlook at home which is a really handy back-up for both the phone and the contacts on my PC. But the camera did struggle with the amount of contrast in the mountains.

My first post!

2006-02-21T14:01:00.000Z

Wow. My first post as part of the blogsphere. If only I'd thought beforehand about what to write! Still, the creation of the blog has been, in itself quite exiting.

So what am I going to do here?

Well ... I don't know. I guess I'll record some stuff about what I'm doing, at home, and probably at work as well; things that pique my interest and just about anything else that takes my fancy.

I've been stimulated to start this as a result of some work around word of mouth as a marketing influence, and particularly the mass of comment about how important blogs and other online consumer generated media (CGM) can be. So far though, I'm not convinced, though I do think they are a great idea.

We'll just have to see where we end up ...