<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for eaonp</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/eaonp/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/eaonp/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:20:26 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Brands are embracing content marketing; but half unclear on what success looks like</title><link>http://www.adnews.com.au/yafNews/02DF5C20-ABBD-11E6-85306AAA59175D71#comment-3006023537</link><description>&lt;p&gt;119 respondents&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 21:20:26 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Alcohol ads on social media linked to underage drinking</title><link>http://www.adnews.com.au/alcohol-on-social-underage-drinking#comment-2980084664</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Teenagers have never drank alcohol under-age before social media.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 01 Nov 2016 18:50:59 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Millennials are the biggest spending generation but brands struggle to engage</title><link>http://www.adnews.com.au/08D42D90-9736-11E6-85306AAA59175D71#comment-2967213018</link><description>&lt;p&gt;As this piece is essentially a 'native' ad I guess we are required to suspend disbelief. Much assertion, few facts.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2016 19:50:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Ritson deconstructed - he's right about strategy, but wrong about social media</title><link>http://www.adnews.com.au/opinion/ritson-deconstructed-he-s-right-about-strategy-but-wrong-about-social-media#comment-2713902850</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Some of Mark Ritson's material was clearly hyperbole however to criticisms that begin with assertions like 'modern consumer(s) want real-time engagement that’s personalized' I'd ask - where is your evidence?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 05 Jun 2016 20:21:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Off Brief: NothingÂ© is possible</title><link>http://www.adnews.com.au/opinion/off-brief-nothing-is-possible#comment-2690007637</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Nietzsche marketing.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 22 May 2016 19:37:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Industry needs to build the âmodern plannerâ</title><link>http://www.adnews.com.au/news/industry-needs-to-build-the-modern-planner#comment-2493161335</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Presumably then, the modern planner is one who is adept in applied logical fallacies, strawman development and quantum woo. Most of them are, to be fair.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2016 21:42:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Mark Ritson: Replacing &amp;#8216;digital&amp;#8217; with &amp;#8216;interactive&amp;#8217; is a mistake</title><link>https://www.marketingweek.com/2016/01/20/mark-ritson-replacing-digital-with-interactive-is-a-mistake/#comment-2470842817</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm reminded of a little snippet of an 'interview' that Morrissey conducted with Joni Mitchell on NPR or something in the mid 90's.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Morrissey to Joni: Do they still refer to you as a female songwriter?...it's become such a ludicrous title because to be called a female songwriter.?&lt;br&gt;Joni: ...It implies limitations.&lt;br&gt;Morrissey: Well, it implies that it's not a 'real' songwriter.&lt;br&gt;Joni: Yeah.&lt;br&gt;Morrissey: I mean, you couldn't imagine, for instance, saying Paul McCartney's a great 'male' songwriter.'&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Fair play to Hesz and co, 'digital' implies limitations.&lt;br&gt;But does 'interactive' counter that?&lt;br&gt;While they may say that 'interactive' is not a replacement term but by the insertion it still implies limitations. It's like a subset.&lt;br&gt;Except it isn't.&lt;br&gt;If one takes the view that all communications are about stimulus-and-response (rather the the old world view of 'message comprehension, usp and the like) then ALL media are interactive - when they work. They ilicit a response of some sort. &lt;br&gt;We're in a Sturgeon's Revelation kind of loop of 'otherness'.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2016 17:47:29 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: digital advertising. where did it all go wrong?</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2015/09/digital-advertising-where-did-it-all-go_4.html#comment-2254133093</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Interesting. Will have to have a closer look. Cheers. Hope all is well in London town.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2015 23:44:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I see you baby...shakin' that ass #signal</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2015/08/i-see-you-babyshakin-that-ass-signal.html#comment-2225958881</link><description>&lt;p&gt;cheers Peter,&lt;br&gt;Will do.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2015 06:30:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: aberrant salience meets rosser reeves uptown</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2015/05/aberrant-salience-meets-rosser-reeves.html#comment-2040411945</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes. We mean the same thing, My choice of words was clumsy. I'll rewrite that bit.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2015 18:00:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: the brains of millennials are (not) being rewired by the internet </title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-brains-of-millennials-are-not-being.html#comment-2007763983</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I've been led to believe that Jung's theory is more along the lines of philosophical musing but I'm doing my best to learn ;)&lt;br&gt;Will check out your book recco.&lt;br&gt;Nice to hear from you E&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2015 20:25:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: the streisand effect</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-streisand-effect.html#comment-1995077960</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Ah, ok. Will amend. Ta&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2015 20:19:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: over the counter-culture</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2015/04/over-counter-culture.html#comment-1991643581</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Good point. Was slightly inferring something similar re Uber et al, but you're right it swings further. Interesting.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2015 09:16:57 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: norman whitfield and barrett strong are here to make everything right that's wrong</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2015/03/norman-whitfield-and-barrett-strong-are.html#comment-1914771099</link><description>&lt;p&gt;will have a watch later, ta.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:35:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: norman whitfield and barrett strong are here to make everything right that's wrong</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2015/03/norman-whitfield-and-barrett-strong-are.html#comment-1914769243</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Sure. Depends on the frame. sometimes you get the germ of an idea out of discussion groups, however asking people to explain their behaviour or evaluate creative work rarely goes well.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:34:52 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: never tell anyone outside the agency what you're thinking</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2015/01/never-tell-anyone-outside-agency-what.html#comment-1793188787</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'll take those comments back to the agency and get back to you ;)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:00:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Dunning-Kruger Peak of Advertising</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-dunning-kruger-peak-of-advertising.html#comment-1737767862</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Indeed, cheers.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2014 19:05:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Maslow was wrong</title><link>http://www.adnews.com.au/opinion/maslow-was-wrong#comment-1721235413</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Maslow has an entire industry of self-help literature to answer for ;)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2014 20:59:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: bring the noise (or...why quiet fixing is the enemy within)</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2014/11/bring-noise-orwhy-quiet-fixing-is-enemy.html#comment-1714444538</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Cheers mate. I've got the Toyota Way book at home somewhere, should go and have a re-read.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2014 17:23:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: influencer theory is the wrong end of the stick</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2014/09/influencer-theory-is-wrong-end-of-stick.html#comment-1582119744</link><description>&lt;p&gt;good strategy&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2014 01:51:17 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: influencer theory is the wrong end of the stick</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2014/09/influencer-theory-is-wrong-end-of-stick.html#comment-1581757239</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Wouldn't be surprised at a no vote. Whichever way it goes the entire UK can now clearly see (if they couldn't already) that all their party options are degrees of flakiness. While in Australia that has never been in doubt, obviously.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2014 18:54:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: influencer theory is the wrong end of the stick</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2014/09/influencer-theory-is-wrong-end-of-stick.html#comment-1581708073</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You have probably guessed that I'm still enthral to Gigerenzer's 'recognition validity'.&lt;br&gt;Conditions for influencable-ness are largely the business of mediation. Though I can't participate, the independence referendum is interesting from that point of view. Given that the polls and media are predicting an 80% turnout (vs circa 40/50% for a regular general election) If true, this expected turnout is as much an artefact of mass mediation as anything else. Kahneman would call this 'availability'. Both him and Gigerenzer probably agree on much more than they would like to admit to each other.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2014 18:33:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: red stitching turn ups and creative publicity</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2014/08/red-stitching-turn-ups-and-creative.html#comment-1562648186</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Exactly.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2014 22:09:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Art versus science riles clashing ECDs</title><link>http://www.bandt.com.au/News/Creative/Art-versus-science-riles-clashing-ECDs#comment-1431407608</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Science doesn't just mean technology. At a basic level advertising/communications need to be noticed (either explicitly or implicitly) to have any effect. The (eg) social sciences help us understand what will be likely get noticed and to what degree - and this informs what the role of the creativity should be. &lt;br&gt;The two things work together.&lt;br&gt;For the most part technologies are simply tools. Means to an end.&lt;br&gt;I'm on Nagee's side on this one. There always needs to be an idea.&lt;br&gt;Though, if i hear 'culture eats strategy...' one more time I shall lose the will to live.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2014 22:14:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: carpenters law</title><link>http://eaonpritchard.blogspot.com/2014/04/carpenters-law.html#comment-1356190452</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I also like - you can have good, fast and cheap. Pick two.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">eaon pritchard</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 26 Apr 2014 01:23:25 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>