Denuology: The Observation and Observations of Denuo. » cchen

Denuo @ Media 2010 Sydney to Debunk Sacred Cows of Marketing

cchen — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 20:58:02 +0000

Photo Credit: X|Media|Lab

Tim Harris and Saneel Radia recently descended upon Sydney to talk marketing creativity and make tangential TMNT references at Media 2010, a one-day international gathering of media, marketing and advertising leaders. Denuo was excited to be represented among this influential group to discuss the new rules for success in the evolving digital landscape.

In Sacred Cows Stifling Marketing Creativity, Tim and Saneel identify the sacred cows that lead to less creative organizations, and offer up their perspective on the philosophies that make creative companies successful.

Keep reading for reactions and video from our presentation, as well as Saneel’s podcast interview with Australian mag, Marketing.

Video: Tim and Saneel present @ Media 2010

(Will open new window)

#media_2010: Reactions

Podcast: Marketing interviews Saneel Radia

Prior to Media 2010, Saneel connected with reporter Sean Greaney via podcast to discuss agency structures of the future and how social media has evolved and continues to be impacted by the advent of apps and technology such as the iPad. Saneel pontificates on tomorrow’s talent, shares his obsession with foursquare and being an Aardvark resource and even accuses the interviewer of internet-stalking him.

Listen to the full interview here.

This podcast appears in Marketing Magazine online, a leading Australian trade pub that has been covering industry news in the marketplace for over 25 years.

Koalas: They’re cute and sleepy.

Thanks to Mary DeBrunner for contributing to this article.

This podcast appears in Marketing magazine online, a leading Australian trade pub that has been covering industry news in the marketplace for over 25 years. Check out the full interview here: http://tinyurl.com/yalbceg

Top 5: Worst Fake-Celeb Twitter Pages

cchen — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 23:57:42 +0000

If you read The Superficial, watch E! in lieu of evening news, or hungrily flip through InTouch at the grocery only to gingerly return its battered pages to its shelf with your pride just slightly wounded, you’re my celeb-whore soul mate. And since we are such kindred spirits, you should already know that Twitter is the ultimate celeb-whore feeding grounds, where digital stalking thrives, guilt-free and fully endorsed.

But not everything is happy and healthy in the CelebTwittersphere. Once plaguing America Online chatrooms and LiveJournal communities, a renewed epidemic of celeb fakes is taking over Twitter. And this time around, it’s somehow more damaging. Tony La Russa was going to take it to the courtroom, and Sarah Palin was forced to start her own Twitter account. I, too, have been a victim — of following many a fake. Twitter deserves some credit for attempting to take action with their beta Verified Account service, but so far it’s been used sparingly, at record-setting snail’s pace.

Thus, on my own weak vendetta to “research” and weed out the fakest of the fake, I’ve determined the Top Five Worst Fake-Celeb Twitter Pages for your viewing pleasure:

5. @Christian_bale_ | Victims: 511

I came across this gem during my recent Christian Bale re-obsession, thinking that despite his fiercely guarded privacy and angry “Bale Out” inclinations, he’d have some kind of publicist-run Twitter page. Wrong, so wrong. Please note the complete disregard for spelling above the second-grade level, rampant use of exclamation marks and emoticons, and disturbingly out of nowhere, a “man crush” on some guy named Brandon Heath. And for crying out loud, his chosen avatar is from Newsies. Yet, “Christian” attempts to ground himself in reality by sporadically referring to his real-life wife and family, entering that troubling, uncomfortable zone of Real Fakeism — where parody crosses the line of identity theft. If only this took on the satire so nicely done by @pbateman.

Update: After personally confronting “Christian,” I received this ambiguous reply: “@chenney: you can say what you like, but i am who i am and i would never lie about it.” OMG. Is that really you, CB?!?!?!

4. @TheRealTimTebow | Victims: 2,220

I love Gator football, and it pains me to see a fellow fan smear the name of our holy Heisman quarterback. “Tim” is the epitome of Real Fakeism, tweeting about football practice, about performing more circumcisions (like potato chips, he just can’t stop at one), and even challenging another faker to prove his own authenticity: “@uftimtebow Maybe you and I can meet sometime and settle who the real Tim Tebow is.” (Where? Your fantasy football forum?) Has also made the grievous error of using the phrase, “Getting my Tweet on.”

3. @johncmayermusic | Victims: 152

Would anyone dare pretend to be the real John Mayer, one of the most active and omnipresent celebrities on Twitter, with a Verified Account of 1.6 million followers that’s rumored to have caused his break-up with Jennifer Aniston? Yes; d-bag quota filled. Though I do enjoy “John’s” practice in humility via polling: “On a scale of 8-10, how much do I look like Robert Pattinson?”

2. @governorpalin | Victims: 755

Final tweet: “To the hundreds of followers of this account. FULL DISCLOSURE: THIS IS A PARODY ACCOUNT. I’M NOT THE REAL PALIN. Just wanted to be clear…”

Not only a faker, but also a sell-out. Should’ve taken tips from @EXGovSarahPalin.

1. @TheRealJacko | Victims: 1,351

Really? Really. Of all people to fake, you choose Michael Jackson? “Michael,” who is “Official,” started tweeting about rehearsals in May. July 5, he began tweeting posthumously: “Hi guys, it’s Michael here. Just in limbo at the moment whilst Jehovah decides if I’ve been a good or bad boy in my life. I love you all xxx.” This leaves me wondering why he didn’t just reply @Jehovah.

Comment back if you find your own horrifying Twitter fakes. And, as always, follow us at the very non-fake @denuology.

From blog to book deal.

cchen — Mon, 04 May 2009 22:36:33 +0000

I guess the Internets has done the same thing for unsigned artists as it has for moonlighting authors. More and more bloggers are seeing their creativity pay off not only in traffic, but also in book deals:

Stuff White People Like

Stuff On My Cat

I Can Has Cheezburger?

Hot Chicks With Douchebags

Tucker Max (NSFW, unless you have a conveniently inward-facing desk.)

Tiny Art Director

Keep reading about the Stuff Everyone Likes: cold-hard cash.

Some of these have been pretty sweet deals for a personal blogging habit; NY Times reported that Stuff White People Like blogger Christian Lander received an estimated $300,000 for his dead-on/controversial observations (“#14: Having Black Friends”).

I find myself tempted to buy these books, despite logic telling me that I can read/have already read this stuff online — for free-ee. I did, however, buy Max’s I Hope They Serve Beer In Hell during a flight delay (you could say that I was in a self-loathing mood), plunging me into the darkest memoirs of the foulest male psyche ever, and I’m still traumatized to this day. And yes, I totally finished the book in less than 24 hours. (Liken it to a car wreck. With B-squad strippers.)

A happy result from these blog-to-book success stories is the DIY mentality of bypassing publishers entirely, thanks to services like Lulu. That’s what prolific Twitter user James Bridle did, creating the first ever “Tweetbook,” aptly titled My Life In Tweets. Not exactly skyrocketing up the NYT Best Sellers, but sort of gets you thinking: is my stuff good enough for print?

Blogging is a waste of time, a diversion from “real” work, and bloggers who go full-time are just lucky bastards. Meanwhile, books are revered, signed, preserved in libraries for posterity — the key to immortality, even. The goal still remains to be in print. It makes living in this age of touting instant gratification, timestamps and 140-character limits quite the paradox. (Heyy, like a Tweetbook!) The more blogs/pulses I read, the more I crave quality time with a 600-page paperback. Sometimes just to salvage a brain cell.

Digital backlash? Nay. The attention span will continue to splinter to the point in which I will be furious if someone’s status isn’t updated by the minute…as they’re sitting two feet away. There is a pathetically severe need for cats with fifty things balanced on them, celebrity fug, and cilantro porn. Maybe blogs give us the opportunity to consume vapor without judgment. Maybe I don’t need the validation of a book club, nor pretend to like Jane Austen because I have two X chromosomes. Maybe I can make an anti-Jane Austen blog and eventually publish it with Lulu. Maybe someday. Someday.

Blogosphere: the new land of opportunity.

Defending my right to meh.

cchen — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 21:21:20 +0000

John Durbin demonstrating the importance of meh at a Denuo outing.

Generation Y seems to be plagued with the label of being…I dunno…indifferent. Marketers spend billions attempting to get through to us, and so far it looks like discordant jingles and sacrificial non-friendships are the only things worth acknowledging these days. Figures that we’re responsible for perpetuating the ultimate expression for apathy: meh (or “meah” if you’re nasal).

Yes, I know. It’s been around for a while, and became official last year. But has anyone ever figured out where it came from? Keep reading to find out.

Many credit an episode from “The Simpsons” for first using the word. But its popularity is in written form rather than spoken. I’m assuming an efficient online version of the shoulder shrug was needed (thanks to the increase in yawn-inducing iChats) and an emoticon simply wouldn’t do. From “eh,” to “bleh,” to “bah,” to “feh,” nothing does more justice for “that comment is so worthless a bleating goat would disapprove” than “meh.”

But in very un-meh fashion, a backlash is happening.

A few weeks ago, John Hodgman of “The Daily Show” and Apple fame tweeted:

Did I ever tell you people how much I hate the word ‘meh’? Nothing announces ‘I have missed the point’ more than that word…It is the essence of blinkered Internet malcontentism. And a rejection of joy.

Wow, who’s the killjoy now, Microsoft guy? I never realized that when I responded to someone with “meh” that I was sucking all the sunshine and candy out of this world.

The Tribune blogged about Hodgman’s comments and collected 81 responses, with a few choice comments echoing his sentiment:

… “Meh” is a pathetic excuse for verbal expression. Even the apathetic can, and should, do better than that, if for nothing else than for the sake their of verbal fluency. But then again, I guess if you’re apathetic you really don’t care.

— Amanda, Miami, FL

Both meh and my bad make the user sound uneducated and juvenile, 5th grade maybe if that high. Folks, use real words.

— Danny Webster, Island Lake, IL

If we continue to use “meh”, then the terrorists have won.

— daeviant, Arlington Heights, IL

Okay, so not only does my use of “meh” encourage “blinkered Internet malcontentism,” but also makes me pathetic, juvenile (5th grade, at best) and a terrorist (who has won).

I suppose a more appropriate alternative to “meh” would be:

That is insufficient in value and does not persuade me to respond at this moment, though I thoroughly respect your contribution to this conversation and to the world. You are a delight.

And undoubtedly, the person would respond, “Meh.”

So my lethargic campaign with meh-ing continues, and will continue, until I find it severely uncool in another year. (Rest in peace, LMAO.)

Next, I shall conquer the use of baroo?, the passive-aggressive version of “huh?” and pffft, the poor man’s version of “meh.”