DISQUS

Podcamp started as a series of conversations, in many ways, over time, we've sometimes drifted more towards the presenter/audience model than necessary.

I find that I may learn a thing or two in sessions, but that by far, it's the opportunity to see friends and meet new people, to talk about stuff I care about with others who can add perspective and challenge my assumptions- that's where the value is extracted. I often think I just have to find a way to get my friends together without the "excuse" of a conference.

But I think there's an evolution here. Conferences may work best if we look at them as concentrated college coursework- you can go to class or skip class, but in the end, it's who you met there and what you do with the knowledge you gained that's important.

Podcamp Boston One was like freshman year- I learned a lot about honing my craft and I didn't know enough at that point to really ask or formulate the best questions. I formed great friendships with those I met there, and they are part of my daily life now, regardless of location. Now, the conference sessions I get the most out of are the more nuanced discussions, and sitting down with a few of my friends and comparing notes provides the greatest education.

Personally, I see Podcamp as my laboratory for trying new ideas. Speaking at them has not only gotten me paid speaking gigs, but it's where I got a ton of experience speaking before an audience of peers and learned what worked and what didn't. (That's also the reason I love adding things like "Battledecks" and Ignite/Pecha Kucha like sessions- it's like presentation boot camp.)

But that's me.

I agree entirely and wrote about that over on my blog http://www.whitneyhoffman.com/?p=642, knowing I'd take up too much space here. The new thing makes the old thing move over some, but doesn't destroy it entirely. I think, as Matt Mason might say, newspapers have to think about getting out of the paper and ink business and into the news business, as that's where their primary value is, just like music companies are in the music bsuiness, not the plastic disc business.

I think this is what causes most people's brain to hurt- how do I balance the immediacy of now, with time shifting, with creating an archive? How much of the content that we produce should have some restricted access, like an invite only country-club party, dealing with experiences that come with a certain cache and panache by being there in person- think attending TED in person rather than virtually? How much of it do we open up to others who will still pay to be part of the party, even if it happens remotely? How important is the person to person face time? Why is synchronous still important if everyone can also broadcast and let everybody share virtually in a version of the experience? How do we make the case for synchronous over virtual?
Part of this also goes back to things you've talked about in the past- how much un-mined data is out there? I know, for example, I got great travel recommendations from twitter, better advice than I got from just reading guide books (even though they were helpful , including historical information, etc.). Yet some of the best experiences for me were the person to person tours we got- where someone was showing me their favorite stuff and talking about it in a way only locals can do- the little stories that bring a place alive and make it more than just "blah blah Independence Hall, blah blah Liberty Bell" etc. (to pick on Philly for a moment).
What I am finding is the face to face experience adds value I would never otherwise get, but to stay connected, asynchronously information allows the ambient attention stuff- the background, side knowledge that lets us get to really know people more in depth, works pretty well virtually.

What do you think?

JJ Abrams, TED Talk, about the magic box, kept coming to mind all during the movie. He is a consummate story teller, and that is the one thing many movies overlook. Sure, visuals are fantastic, but if the storyline is weak, the end product will be as well.

John Lassiter, from Pixar and Disney Animation talks a lot about the Disney school of storytelling, and that there needs to be a tear for every laugh. Pixar movies, as a result, have the same sort of staying power that classic Disney movies have, and that many newer pictures like "The Ant Bully" or "Fish Tales" do not.

And this all applies to everything we talk about in new media, because if your baseline story and product are not compelling, no amount of window dressing will get you past the fact that the underlying product is just not delightful. It's not compelling. There's no reason to return, time and again, for second helpings.

Great stories and products, by contrast, invite revisits- Eoin Colfer once remarked that for kids, books were read and re-read so often, it's like they were drinking the ink off the page- that's what a compelling story does. And it's why stories like Pride and Prejudice can be retold in new formats and still succeed- because the underlying story and message speaks to us and is compelling, like fables and legends (or good jokes), no matter how many times or versions we see.

While I think this is probably a plateau before the other sections of the forest have their turn to reset and contract, I think the things we will get out of this recession is a re-establishment of base priorities. People are figuring out what is really important, and what is just silly in their lives, and have to come to terms with the difference between want and need, which is a good lesson for all of us.

I certainly think retweets can be a great way to spread information within your network, but it's like playing postoffice- it's merely repeating information, rather than creating it on your own. If your reputation is going to be ranked by whether or not anyone ever retweets information, we could all easily end up with a twitter stream full of nothing other than other people's regurgitated ideas. Relevancy is more than whether or not something is passed along the chain.

Great Post! I would only add that foreplay happens long before the bedroom- things like helping to make sure all the forms are signed, lunches made, and the other things that hit moms as "Oh my god, I forgot to" in quiet moments will go a long way as well. Also, consider taking a weekend away, just the two of you, or maybe even a whole week, if you can, without the kids. I just got back from a great holiday with my husband, and it was about having fun and connecting as a couple. We didn't have to worry about being interrupted, we didn't have to worry about anything rather than where we wanted to eat or grab a coffee- and that ability to just be with each other and enjoy ourselves like we did before we had kids was worth every cent spent on it.

I don't know what algorythm they use, but I can tell you I have been using twitter since Oct/Nov 2006, if tht helps.Whitney

I think the problem is with the "make you" language, to be honest. No one can "make" someone do anything. What advertising and social media should be about is making a case, building an argument that your product is relevant and solves someone's problem or fills their needs. Especially with large consumer items like cars, this is not gum at the cash register where Wrigley's is as happy with an impulse buy as a well-considered and fully weighed decision. People buy large ticket items (at least most of us...) with a fair amount of research, and the job of marketing and PR is to make sure when people are considering that decision, you are in their matrix of possibilities. You have provided enough background information, enough data, enough exposure that you are a contender. That's where social media is valuable- the conversation around cars for people who are in the market can help convert people on the fence on a more one on one basis, beyond the pressure of the dealership.

So when my minivan, a Toyota Sienna with 186,000 miles and still going strong, eventually gets sick and needs to be put out to pasture, the fact that I know Scott Monty and he talks to me about his companies vehicles that might meet my needs, or that GM is interested in engaging me makes them part of the matrix where I may have discounted them before. Who knows what we'll end up with in the end- that's an economic decision, matched up with the needs of our family, such as whether we need another minivan or can we reasonably go down to a 4 seat passenger car. Other things like whether it's a hybrid are significant in our matrix as well, but the sale is made from the researched contenders + dealership experience + price combined.
The advertising alone only gets my attention, it doesn't "make me" do anything.

I will be out of town...kicking myself. Would love to be there.

I just don't really care about most advertising anymore unless it can capture my attention with value.
For example, I attended a promotion by Ocean Spray for their Cranenergy drink at Philly's 30th Street Station yesterday. But rather than just hand out bottles and bags of craisins, they had Richard Simmons there, dancing, singing, and making the morning commute something beyond fun. I wasn't really sure what to expect, but I was curious and it got me to go and cover it for Twittermoms.
This worked on many levels, not only because the product itself is actually great (I was skeptical about Cranberry and Green tea, but it's surprisingly good) but the event was different, memorable, and meaningful to everyone there. People were taking pictures, getting old Sweating to the Oldies music and videos signed, and I met several people just by taking pictures for them and emailing them to them afterward.

Silly can grab your attention and is more engaging than boring. You can maybe even get your message across, or gain permission at least for slipping in your message (try our new thing). The metric may be how much juice they sell, but the other metric is that people had fun, really enjoyed themselves, and that's as much a part of the brand relationship as the product. I won't forget it any time soon, that's for sure- we'll see if it changes by juice buying behavior :)

I've been giving more and more talks to groups of all sizes and different industries about what these tools are about and how to apply them. I tell them up front they're primary concern is doing something that has relevance to their target market. They have to be useful, they have to be able to tell their story and differentiate themselves from their competition- sometimes these tools can help. Talking to a group of physical therapists yesterday, we were talking not only about competitive advantage, how to listen and participate- but how to make sure their clients understood the progress they were making and why it was important. Especially in the health field, where progress is not instantaneous and people lose sight of goals, tracking information and sharing it with patients and therapists has the potential to make the process of PT more rewarding for both sides of the equation, just as an example.

We're past the Gee Whiz phase. Now it's time to connect the dots, and show how good content drives traffic, but also lets you tell your compelling story.

For what it's worth, I gave up Pepsi as a brand when they got rid of diet pepsi with lemon. The diet pepsi with lemon was fantastic and I come close to preferring it over my omnipresent Tab or diet coke. But alone, a la carte, I just think it's too sweet to bear. i could just buy lemons and put it in myself, but then the grab & go options are more limited.
I mention this to say that even though Pepsi has been a Super Bowl sponsor for years and I was exposed for a week or so at a time to free product as someone on staff, working as part of the Super Bowl on site staff, my opinion of the product still hasn't changed. No more exposure or reminders or the like are going to get me to change my mind.
Sometimes our opinions and preferences about brands get entrenched because of our experiences, and no additional opportunities for trials are going to overcome the fact that the product is okay, but not my first choice.

Let's not even mention how far out of my way I have gone to obtain Tab, or some of my other friends who have driven across the State of Pennsylvania to get their favorite soda...That's brand dedication. People will move mountains to obtain their favorite thing- it becomes an emotional connection they don't want to lose. There are websites that help women find discontinued colors of lipstick and the like, for example. People lobby Ben & Jerry's to bring back retired flavors. We may all be whack jobs, but sometimes, there is no substitute. That's to say, by way of example, that I don't know if all the dollars Pepsi spends trying to make inroads is worth while. The preference, the taste preference, is basic and elemental. I think Pepsi should be very happy with being Pepsi, and be Pepsi, rather than trying to be Coke or anyone else. And if they bring back the diet pepsi with lemon, I know many people in my family alone would be very happy.

Transparency works. We all mess up, and sorry helps. If you look at the doctors who get in the most trouble and accusations of malpractice, it's those with an arrogant, I can do no wrong attitudes, not the ones who treat their patients as people and end up getting the same treatment in return- people are wonderful, but not perfect.
And unfortunately in today's world, accidental "spam" can happen to anyone, and I think we all need to learn to practice a little forgiveness and be a little less reactionary to these small errors.

The problem here is not only the trust issue, but what happens if people don't pay? Do you get to pawn their stuff? Is it covered by your homeowner's and renter's insurance? What happens if your water heater breaks and ruins their stuff? What happens if your stuff is damaged at their place? Maybe we should consider having a garage sale and downsizing rather than park our stash all over the place.

So glad you are coming to Philly! And Alex @Indy Hall is simply fantastic. If you guys need any help, let me know and I'll get the Podcamp people together to lend a hand.

re: visuals-
I use them to illustrate my talk, and keep me on track. I can bore you to death with all the reasons why this is a good idea, including how the brain processes language inputs- but at the heart of it, think of the slides as pictures in a book, and you are providing the captions and stories than link the pictures together into a unfied whole. The closing is the "and the moral of the story is:" when you hit people with the take home points. This also gives you free license to modify your presentation on the fly for the audience, change up your stories, but keep a structure, because you know what the "moral of the story" is supposed to be by the end.

Fantastic post. I agree- there's no one framework that works, but I think merging structure and improv, making sure to deliver relevance to the audience at hand, is not a bad place to start.
One thing I learned this weekend at Podcamp Toronto was how Mark Blevis looks at pacing and attention. He does a refresh, so to speak, about every thee to five minutes- changing tempo, speed, or topic. It keeps the audience with you and keeps their attention focused. This, along with some pacing advice I got from an Ira Glass presentation about how he puts together This American Life, has me rethinking how I edit my audio and how I pace my writing. It's building my house of ideas, so the sum of the parts is cohesive, but the individual elements still shine and have their place in the overall structure without getting lost.

I wrote a post over on my blog about "Why we should care about Attention" to answer this question. (www.whitneyhoffman.com)
Basically, what we have here is a classic case of mixing the metaphor, straight out of Predictably Irrational by Dan Ariely. We have a social relationship, but when it gets financial, it muddies the water, as much as if you offered to pay your Mom for that fine Thanksgiving dinner. What we're doing in this new age of consumer-centered marketing is playing with this mixed message of when we can ask our "friends" for money and financial support in return for "x"- the idea/service/product we are trying to capitalize on.

Sorry- that's kings of non-fiction- http://www.amazon.com/New-Kings-Nonfiction-Ira-...

I hate to go geek, but you know I can't help myself. Dunbar's number and the expanded Kennilworth number of about 300 (less famous because Malcolm Gladwell only talked about Dunbar in the Tipping Point) are based on the number of social relationships we can keep track of and their inter-related relationships as well. This is the theoretical limit based on the size of our neocortex in our brains, not something just pulled out of the air.
So you can have casual relationships with many more than 150 or 300 people. However, the intimacy of the relationships change after you reach these thresholds. It's why, as the pastor said, a different type of management comes into play when the number of parishioners tops 300- you can't reliably track, for example, that Mary is best friends with Sue, who married Gerald's brother in law, and they each have three kids; Mary's mother is undergoing treatment for breast cancer, etc. You start to lose those details that bond a group together and allow you to track their lives like you would in a family group.

Twitter, where we all post some of the more mundane day to day stuff, allows a greater insight through ambient attention into these details; I find I remember more than I thought I could about what Jay is doing in Toronto, and how his baby is doing; That Mike is a new Dad in NYC and has started writing for Dad-o-Matic; etc. This means even when I see people I don't know as well as others, they will ask how the kids liked summer camp, or if the dog is okay after her surgery- there's an extension of the social and intimate relationship that is created through these tools. And if you share, people do the same. You might not be able to keep up with everything, you might lose details, but it sure helps maintaining a sense of intimacy even if you don't talk as frequently as you'd like with your friends.
There are still connectors who are great hubs of information and know who to put together- Malcolm Gladwell writes about this phenomenon in another amazing piece called the "6 degrees of Lois Weisberg" you can find in the Kings of New Fiction edited by Ira Glass from This American Life.
Some time soon, I'll write a post about the 6 degrees of Podcamp Boston- that in and of itself would be fascinating.

@Ari- what about just economics- micro and macro are part of a larger picture, and you can't have one without the other.

Ah yes, and after the recovery (ha) it will become Macro everything.

Too narrow a focus, you lose the big picture. Too Broad a focus, you lose the detail. We all have to master the art of nuance and shifting focus to maintain clarity of perspective.

I've been considering doing a visual diary of what's going on around here. I see a gradual increase in homes for sale, homes for sale for longer periods of time; farmers trying to sell off their open lots; businesses leaving one at a time out of smaller shopping centers, more and more desperate sale signs in the windows of those that remain. This is also telling since I live in an area heavily involved in the pharma, banking and corporate America.
You can see the bad stuff coming, and the ground signs of any recovery by driving around and talking to people- just like the folks who recommend management by walking around, you never have a real sense of what's happening unless you keep your eyes open and take a look at what's around you.
Once you build your awareness, you can then pick a place to begin your work, and make changes that are relevant to your community, based in reality, rather than just speculation. And unless you maintain a sense of relevance, filling a need- everything else is merely window dressing.

The problem is for the first luddite who tries to bookmark the site with the post it.