Linkpile

Destroyed copy of “Buying In” as a Kindle-holder

Available from BustedTypewriter on Etsy, for $25 — part of his Don’t Judge Me project.

This hardcover copy of “Buying In” by Rob Walker has been sealed and cut by hand to fit Amazon’s Kindle 6″ Wireless Reading Device.

More here. Thanks for the tip, BT. (I think.)

Save

Linkpile

Linkpile

  • Commenters become stars: And advertisers are there to recruit them.
  • I AM CARLES: Hipster Runoff brand extension.Or “brand” “extension.”
  • The End of Indie: “Indie doesn’t mean anything anymore. It’s dead. Which is OK, because it won. Open source, Twitter. Indie won. Etsy. The irresistible decline of major labels and network TV and corporate publishing. Indie won.” I don’t actually know precisely what that means. I think I half agree.
  • The Nuances of the FREE! Experiment: Dan Ariely on the way his research is used in two books.
  • Antidepressant use nearly doubles in U.S.: “Between 1996 and 2005, the rate of those reporting they had used antidepressants in the past year jumped from 5.8 percent to 10.1 percent. On a national scale, this translates to an increase from about 13.3 million people to 27 million.” Bummer.
  • Listener’s facial expression alters speaker’s language: Study: “Speak to a positive listener and you’ll likely use more abstractions and subjective impressions, whilst if you talk to a negative listener you’ll probably find yourself sheltering in the security of objective facts and concrete details.”
  • the writing’s on the wall: Got a note from the creator of this blog, which looks interesting. Mostly visual. This post: “My take on the designer’s pin board is it’s often a better reflection of what they are all about than the actual work they produce.”
  • Rhino Figurine | Significant Objects: “Do you ever struggle to remember insignificant facts?” Story by Nathaniel Rich.
  • Cow Vase | Significant Objects: “What I’m saying is, you basically pretended you were a mountain.” Story by Ed Park

Even threats are sponsored now

threatanditssponsorThis weekend I opened a mysterious-looking letter that I assumed would be junk mail. It turned out to be from “The Credit and Collection Unit of BusinessWeek Magazine,” which had sent me a scary-looking “Invoice” and letter that suggested I am somehow in debt to their organization. “If you dispute this debt,” the form letter told me, I could write in with a reply pleading my case. “Failure to respond will result in further communication from this office.”

Whatever. In point of fact I merely decided not to renew my subscription. Obviously Business Week knew this, as they stopped sending me the magazine once my paid-up period ended. In other words: We’re square. No “debt” involved. (And I’m not sure that sending a menacing letter makes me anxious to rethink my decision at the moment. But that’s another story.)

So anyway I’m about to toss the thing in the trash when I notice something else:

An insert touting DirectTV. That’s right — an ad! Somehow, Business Week’s “collection” department has apparently managed to attract at least one sponsor!

Are you people kidding? Has this ever worked? I’m thinking anybody getting a letter like this is either a little light on cash, or simply annoyed that Business Week is treating him or her like a deadbeat for the non-offense of deciding not to subscribe to Business Week any longer. Why does DirecTV, or any business, want to associate itself with this moment in a consumer’s life? Does anybody receiving one of these things ever think: “Oh, man, this magazine is hassling me about my subscription. Oh, wait, check this out — I think I’ll try DirectTV!”

Technology, information, and people shouting down their enemies

The various new communication technologies that have come into our lives in the last 10 or 15 years are amazing: It’s never been easier to access information, to hook up with whatever sources you choose, from international media outlets to informed citizens in your very community.

What then are we to make of the recent rise of a rather retro form of communication: Shouting down ideological opponents. I mean literally shouting, drowning out out others’ ability to express views by way of sheer volume. I’ve watched some of these clips of health-care “town halls” — not to mention the gatherings where some person stands up and screams about Barack Obama being “a citizen of Kenya” or whatever — and I really wonder how close we are to hurling rocks and bottles as a manner of dispute settlement.

So are wondrous technology and shout-em-down tactics at odds? Is there a tension there?

I just mentioned having seen “the clips,” but of course I just saw snippets. Sometimes I saw them on television. For years and years people have complained about sound/video bites dominating news cycles at the expense of more considered coverage. Newer technology has not arrested that trend; it has accelerated it. There are more clips to choose from; the competition to air them asap is ever more intense; the overall pace of broadcast media continues to quicken; etc. But all that aside, some I did not see on television, and I didn’t have to see any of them that way, since all are online.

If a crowd shouts down a politician, the broader context matters very little in the media ecosystem. The story is: Crowd shouts down politician. And here’s the clip, edited as tightly as possible for maximum impact. It’s shown over and over, and at some point maybe Jon Stewart will show it again, and make a joke about it. If it’s shown often enough, it starts resemble something real — “The people are outraged!” Ten shouters are multiplied into an imaginary movement of some sort. Pundits and commentators can then say with a straight face that “a lot of American are very angry about this.” It affects the polls, and the change in the polls becomes news. And so on.

A lot of this is very run of the mill, I guess. It’s a variation on the way the media cycle has worked for my entire adult life, and the kind of pseudo-event discourse Daniel Boorstin was writing about in The Image, well before I was born.

The exception is the degree to which actual shouting is a serious factor in this process. That, I’m sorry to say, strikes me as a new development.

UPDATE 8/12: Some examples from today’s papers: AP: “‘One day God will stand before you and judge you!’ shouted a man before security guards approached and he left the room.” NYT: “‘This is about the dismantling of this country,’ Katy Abram, 35, shouted at Mr. Specter, drawing one of the most prolonged rounds of applause.” WSJ: “Outside, the gathering verged on a street brawl. The opposing forces lined up like screaming armies on either side of the street, about 1,000 people a side.”

Linkpile

In The New York Times Magazine: No Mas Cassius Clay T

09consumed-190CALL IT A DRAW
An indie designer comes up against a big trademark owner — and the unexpected happens.

When the indie brand No Mas got an e-mail message from CKX Inc., the company that holds a majority stake in Muhammad Ali Enterprises and oversees the rights to commercial uses of his name, his image and his likeness, founder Chris Isenberg pretty much knew what was up. Most such stories end unhappily, with the small-brand creator stymied, the rights owner accused of bullying, or both. But this one has a twist ending…

Read the column in the August 9, 2009, New York Times Magazine, or here. (See the T shirt more clearly here on the No Mas site.)

Discuss, make fun of, or praise this column to the skies at the Consumed Facebook page.

Linkpile

Linkpile

Advertising, entertainment, and what’s for dinner tonight

If you missed it, I really recommend Michael Pollan’s cover story from the Times Mag this weekend, on food preparation as something we watch on television, rather than something we do. It’s really well done. Here’s one side note that’s particularly relevant to this site:

It’s no accident that Julia Child appeared on public television — or educational television, as it used to be called. On a commercial network, a program that actually inspired viewers to get off the couch and spend an hour cooking a meal would be a commercial disaster, for it would mean they were turning off the television to do something else. The ads on the Food Network, at least in prime time, strongly suggest its viewers do no such thing: the food-related ads hardly ever hawk kitchen appliances or ingredients (unless you count A.1. steak sauce) but rather push the usual supermarket cart of edible foodlike substances, including Manwich sloppy joe in a can, Special K protein shakes and Ore-Ida frozen French fries, along with fast-casual eateries like Olive Garden and Red Lobster.

Yes. And of course those advertisers know exactly what they are doing: Associating their processed or prepared-for-you foodstuffs and meals with the vague idea of hands-on cooking. Maybe watching someone expertly prepare a meal from scratch is something that makes you feel good, and if a can of Manwhich can associate itself with that good feeling, nonconsciously of course, perhaps that association will still lurk in your brain somewhere as you wheel through Kroger.

The whole piece is actually full of great stuff about consumer behavior, advertising, and entertainment, filtered through the lens of food. Great stuff.

Linkpile

In The New York Times Magazine: Latisse

02consumed-190 EYELASH OF THE BEHOLDER:
A prescription product doesn’t claim to cure an illness. But is it a symptom of a different malady?

During clinical testing of a glaucoma medication called Lumigan, Allergan’s researchers noted a side effect: eyelash growth. Recognizing the market potential for such a thing, the company conducted a new safety-and-efficacy study, this time making the former side effect the main focus, explained Robert Grant, the president of Allergan Medical, the company’s aesthetic-products division. In December, the Food and Drug Administration gave Allergan clearance for this new use. By May, Latisse ads were on the air, and in its first three months on the market, the product totaled about $12 million in sales. This suggests that there is a bigger market for “eyelash hypotrichosis” relief than you might have guessed before Latisse’s promotional campaign began….

Read the column in the August 2, 2009, New York Times Magazine, or here.

Discuss, make fun of, or praise this column to the skies at the Consumed Facebook page.

Linkpile

  • LUST: An Exercise in Non-Branding: The new issue of Print has a very interesting article about dope packaging — I mean dope like marijuana, not dope like awesome — by friend of Murketing James Gaddy. Here’s a kind of adjunct on the newly redesigned Printmag.com. But pick up the issue, Print’s been really good lately.
  • Can you lend me a Joseph Beuys artwork?: “More specifically, can you (or someone you know) lend me the parts for it? I am working on a project for PS1 that re-creates Joseph Beuys’ famous “Sled” work from 1969, but using all objects BORROWED from my friends and extended social network.” Click through for details from Stephanie Syjuco.
  • Metal Boot | Significant Objects: “Yet the men Wheat led to war were — very curious to say — his own sworn enemies.” Story by Bruce Sterling.
  • Foppish Figurine | Significant Objects: “A compassionate civil rights activist, he was also a bodybuilder who delighted in beating up hippies.” Story by Rob Baedeker.

Linkpile