The Medium Is Still The Message

Understanding that the Medium is the Message Matters More Than Ever

Since 1964, when Marshall McLuhan coined the phrase "The medium is the message" in his most well-known book Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, folks have scratched their heads over and argued about the meaning of those words. It's quite simple really: What McLuhan is telling us is that the characteristics of a medium influence how the message is received and understood.

McLuhan is known for his visionary interpretation of the effects of technological communication on society. Forty years ago, he predicted electronically connected media would eventually produce a huge global village. With Web 2.0 and mobile devises that do everything but make our lunches, McLuhan's prediction is coming to fruition. In my mind, he is more relevant today than ever.

For marketers and other communicators of messages, we need to go back and reread McLuhan with a new understanding. That simple phrase written during a moment of genius tells us that all recipients of a message have a relationship with the medium carrying that message. Furthermore, we need to understand that relationship. Otherwise, our message fails to deliver the impact necessary to create the corresponding action necessary for our marketing or communications to succeed.

With the coming of social media and the rising importance of web sites to commerce, I have been thinking a lot about how our business communications needs to fits those mediums. With Television and radio before it, newspapers and magazines, direct mail and e-mail, we have studied and learned how to shape the content so the medium's influence and that content work well together. When we achieve that purpose, the message is received and understood as was the desire of the advertiser or marketer or publicist or public relations professional or business communicating the message. The message and the medium are in sync in terms of how they influence the recipients.

For example, a super bowl ad is being carried by television and it enters our living rooms because we choose to watch the football game. If the ad fails to be at least as visual, interesting and surprising as the medium, the message will be lost on most viewers. We would ignore a print message by itself; but put that message into the mouth of a well-known spokesperson or in the context of a good story that moves us to watch, and the ad has a much better chance to move us.

That is what made the Pepsi ads so many years ago with Mean Joe Green exchanging his game jersey for the little boy's Pepsi so relevant and successful. We knew Joe, or we thought we did. But the ad surprised us by showing us a softer side of the muddied, tired and seemingly defeated football player. And the little boy's concern for Mean Joe and his reaction touched us. The same can be true for NASCAR. TV is the perfect medium to bring us both the race and the advertising, whether the ad is painted on a driver's car or features the sport during the commercial. It works because it is in sync with the medium bringing us both the race and the advertising.

But what works on a web site or in social media? The medium in both instances seems to be the same: It is a screen attached to our computers or a mobile device. But is it? Is the relationship we have with our desktop or our laptop the same, and doesn't location play a role in that relationship? And wouldn't our relationship with our PDA or our phone be different, as well?

McLuhan would tell us we need to study those media to understand how to shape the message. I don't think we are doing a good enough job of that yet. We spend lots of time talking about the content, but I think we do so without knowing enough about how our readers or viewers relate to the media itself. When we argue that content must have value, everyone can agree. But I think McLuhan would argue that what has value when received on a desktop is quite different from what has value when received on an iPhone.

I think we must immerse ourselves in understanding the relationship created between the new medium and its audiences. It should matter very much to those of us shaping content for those media. I am one marketer that is going to invest far greater time in understanding those relationships, and I promise to share them with you.

Source: http://lgbusinesssolutions.typepad.com/solutions_to_grow_your_bu/2009/04/understanding-that-the-medium-is-the-message-matters-more-than-ever.html

Tags: Marshall Mcluhan, Global Best Practices, Marketers, Social Media, Pepsi, iPhone, Global IT News, Mean Joe Greene, NASCAR, PDA, messages,

Posted via email from Global Business News

Clean Coal Gets New Backing

The Department of Energy’s flagship “clean coal” power plant has a new lease on life, thanks to a billion dollars from last year’s stimulus package. The plan to build the plant, which will be the first large plant to capture and bury its carbon dioxide emissions in the ground, was scrapped by the Bush Administration in early 2008.

Rekindling the FutureGen project is a signal that the Obama Administration and Energy Secretary Steve Chu won’t just be supporting wind and solar power, but some new fossil fuel technologies, too.

“This important step forward for FutureGen reflects this Administration’s commitment to rapidly developing carbon capture and sequestration technology as part of a comprehensive plan to create jobs, develop clean energy and reduce climate change pollution,” said Steve Chu, Secretary of Energy, in a DOE statement. “The FutureGen project holds great promise as a flagship facility to demonstrate carbon capture and storage at commercial scale. Developing this technology is critically important for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the US, and around the world.”

Carbon capture and sequestration is a hotly debated technology among energy and climate experts. Some environmental groups argue that burying CO2 isn’t feasible in the near-term and merely acts as a rhetorical front for the fossil fuel industries. On the other hand, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the U.N.-backed body of climate researchers, see it as a major part of the long-term energy future. If it works and it’s cheap — two huge ifs — it would provide low-carbon power 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

The Department of Energy, under Chu, had already announced a separate chunk of $2.4 billion for carbon burial, bringing its total support for the tech to $3.4 billion. Politically, it’s a popular “green” technology in the coal states, particularly in the South, where renewable energy resources are more limited than in other areas of the country. And if it works really well, it’s possible that biomass could be burned, which would actually pull carbon out of the atmosphere.

The carbon burial process is geologically complex. You need just the right combination of layers of rock: one porous rock layer, such as sandstone, that can contain the CO2, and then a layer (or layers) of impermeable caprock, such as shale, on top of that to prevent the gas from escaping back to the surface. Just capturing the CO2 out of a mix of other molecules is difficult, too. It takes highly engineered materials that selectively capture CO2 and release it on command. The high-tech nature of both of components of a carbon capture and sequestration plant have soured some utility executives on the technology.

One major problem is that no one has actually tried to bury CO2 in huge quantities, or as industry folks would say, at scale. Without real-world testing, it’s hard to know whether it will be possible to scrub the CO2 from our coal plants at a reasonable cost.

The 275-megawatt FutureGen project has long been intended to be that real world laboratory. First announced by President Bush as a $1 billion project in 2003, it was supposed to prove that coal power plants could effectively capture and store their greenhouse gas emissions underground. The project advanced slowly, though, and its total cost is now estimated at $1.8 billion.

While Chu’s words were a strong indication that the project has his backing, the future of FutureGen is not entirely assured. The DOE and the collection of corporations known as the FutureGen Alliance will take another look at the feasibility of the project in early 2010 before truly moving forward.

Source: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/06/futuregen/

Tags: Clean coal, geologically complex, FutureGen Alliance, DOE, US Department of Energy, CO2, Wired, Obama Administration, Energy Secretary Steve Chu, Bush Administration, Global Best Practices,

Posted via email from Global Business News

Dell Is Monetizing Twitter

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Social media company Twitter is struggling to craft a profitable business model, but the Web-based service has helped Dell Inc chalk up millions of dollars in sales.

Dell said on Thursday it has raked in more than $3 million from Twitter followers who clicked through its posts to its Web sites to make purchases. The company, which has posted to Twitter about two years and tracks the sales with proprietary software, made more than $1 million in the past 6 months.

"We're going to watch it over time to make sure it's tracking at the right level," said Lionel Menchaca, Dell's chief blogger. "It is trending upward and that's what we're going to be looking at overall."

Three million in sales over two years is a pittance for Dell, ranked by IDC as the world's second-largest PC maker in the first quarter of 2009. Dell posted $12.3 billion of revenue in the first quarter of this year, alone. But the PC maker has become one of the first public examples of how companies might profit from Twitter.

Twitter does not charge companies for such benefits, but does not rule out doing so in the future.

"For now, monetization of this type of activity remains unknown," Twitter spokeswoman Jenna Sampson said in a statement. "However, as the network grows, the company will be committing more resources toward profitability."

Gartner analyst Allen Weiner said such financial success could provide a model for Twitter, itself, to make money. "Certainly one of the ways Twitter can begin to think of itself as a money-making operation is to facilitate a lot of these things, build it as part of the infrastructure. So if you're a company, you can pay Twitter a certain amount of money and they can directly distribute coupons on your behalf, or clear transactions," Weiner said.

Twitter is building add-on tools and services for businesses and professional users, co-founder Biz Stone told the Reuters Global Technology Summit last month. Dell said it posts 6 to 10 times a week to its DellOutlet account, which is where the majority of Twitter-based sales have come from. Stephanie Nelson, who manages the account, said almost every post includes a coupon or a link to a sale, and about half of the posts are Twitter-exclusive deals.

The PC maker, which has about 600,000 followers, is one of the Top 100 most-followed accounts on Twitter, according to private trackers TwitterCounter and Twitterholic.

Other non-media companies ranked in the Top 100 include Whole Foods Market Inc, Woot.com, Zappos.com, JetBlue Airways Corp. Whole Foods and JetBlue said they have not tried to monetize their Twitter presence. Woot.com and Zappos.com were not available for comment.

Twitter had approximately 17 million unique U.S.-based visitors in April, and about 24 million worldwide, according to Nielsen. Its number of users has grown by more than a thousand percent over the last year.

Small companies are also finding financial success on Twitter. New Orleans-based Naked Pizza, which turns $1 million in sales annually, is "betting the farm" on its Twitter presence according to co-founder Jeff Leach.

The company, which created a Twitter presence about two and a half months ago and has about 4,300 followers, last week said nearly 69 percent of sales generated during a one-day Twitter advertising blitz came from customers drawn in from the site.

Leach posts 1 to 15 times a day and said his company sees a sustained 20 percent of sales dollars from its Twitter presence. Leach recently put up a billboard advertising the company's Twitter presence and is planning mailings bearing the company's Twitter contact information instead of a phone number.

Source: http://tech.yahoo.com/news/nm/20090612/wr_nm/us_twitter_dell_2

Tags: Dell monetizing Twitter, Twitter, Dell, Jetblue, Woot, Zappos, Naked Pizza, Reuters Global Technology Summit, Biz Stone, Nielsen, IDC, Gartner DellOutlet, Global Best Practices,

Posted via email from Global Business News

Tesla’s Founder Sues Tesla’s CEO

Tesla Motors founder Martin Eberhard is suing current CEO Elon Musk, accusing Musk of taking control of the company, orchestrating his ouster in 2007 and attempting to “rewrite history” to take credit for developing the pioneering electric Roadster the two men worked together to create.

The suit accuses Musk of a litany of complaints including libel, slander and breach of contract in alleging that Eberhard was pushed out of the company, wrongfully denied his severance and forced to watch as Musk publicly disparaged him and “compromised Tesla Motors’ financial health.”

“In his zeal to appropriate Eberhard’s legacy, Musk has instead sullied Tesla Motors’ integrity and blemished Tesla Motors’ reputation and prosperity,” the suit states.

What’s more, the suit states, after pushing Eberhard out of the company he founded in 2002 and withholding his severance because of a blog post, Tesla wrecked his car. Tesla Motors calls the suit a work of fiction and says it will not only vigorously defend itself, but file a countersuit.

“This lawsuit is an unfair personal attack and, more importantly, paints an inaccurate picture of Tesla’s history,” the company said Wednesday night in a statement. “This lawsuit is a fictionalized account of Tesla’s early years — it’s twisted and wrong, and we welcome the opportunity to set the record straight.

As the media have already chronicled extensively, the board of directors unanimously fired Martin, largely over the fact that the cost of the car was more than twice what Martin portrayed it to be at the time. Incidentally, Tesla will also be filing counterclaims and in the process present an accurate account of the company’s history.”

Eberhard’s 22-page suit, which was filed May 26 in San Mateo County (Calif.) Superior Court and seeks unspecified damages, provides a glimpse — albeit a one-sided one — into the circumstances surrounding his abrupt departure from Tesla on Nov. 28, 2007.

Musk had been involved with the company for three years by then, having signed on as one of its first investors in early 2004. “As a result of his increasing financial interest at Tesla Motors,” the suit states, Musk exercised his right to appoint people to Tesla’s board of directors. By the spring of 2007, he’d named three of the seven members.

By that point, the board was well into its search for a CEO to take over for Eberhard, who wanted to devote more time to developing the Roadster. The search continued for several months until, the suit states, Eberhard on Aug. 7, 2007, received a call from Musk stating that Michael Marks would be taking over as CEO.

“At that time, Marks had not been interviewed or approved for the CEO position by either the (board of directors) or the CEO search committee,” the suit alleges. “Prior to this telephone call, Eberhard had not received any notice that he would be expected to step down from the CEO position at this time.”

Four days later, the suit states, the board told Eberhard he was being named president of technology. He would earn $200,000 a year, the same salary he earned as CEO.

“Eberhard agreed to this proposal in order to ensure the continuity of the company,” the suit states. Five weeks later, on Oct. 22, “Marks informed Eberhard that Eberhard’s position with Tesla Motors was unsustainable due to Musk’s persistent calls for Eberhard’s termination,” the suit states. Marks allegedly offered Eberhard the opportunity to resign. In exchange, he would receive six month’s pay and medical benefits in addition to 62,500 shares of Tesla Motors common stock. Eberhard refused.

Marks didn’t last long. He was replaced by Ze’ev Drori as CEO on November 27. According to suit, Musk approached Eberhard on that same day and told Eberhard he had to go. Musk allegedly threatened to convert enough of his preferred stock options to common stock to give him control of three more seats on the board — and the ability to terminate Eberhard.

According to the suit, Musk offered Eberhard the same deal Marks had — take the money and resign. He allegedly sweetened the deal the next day, offering Eberhard $100,000 to be paid in six monthly payments, six months of health insurance, an option to buy 250,000 shares of Tesla Motors common stock and a seat on the company’s board of advisors. Musk gave him until the end of the day to sign the deal.

“With virtually no choice, Eberhard signed the severance agreements that same day,” the suit states. “At the time he was asked to resign, Eberhard was never informed of any reason for the resignation demand, other than Musk’s preference for such.”

Eberhard left on Nov. 28, 2007.

The entrepreneur started a blog some time after that, and on Jan. 10, 2008, wrote a post commenting on “the large number of employees” who had been terminated from Tesla and saying he believed they had been treated unfairly. Four days later, Drori allegedly met with Eberhard and told him he’d violated the non-disparagement clause of his severance agreements by writing the post. Eberhard disagreed but deleted the post.

Tesla apparently wasn’t satisfied. According to the suit, the company’s general counsel e-mailed Eberhard on Jan. 28 to say the company was terminating his severance package and dismissing him from the advisory board. The suit accuses Musk of breach of contract.

Eberhard’s complaints don’t stop there. He claims Musk has “persistently and continuously made defamatory, disparaging, negative and harmful statements” about him in public and within the company while portraying himself as the “founder” and “creator” of Tesla Motors. The suit also says Musk has “made false statements that Eberhard had been terminated from Tesla Motors because of performance and management issues, despite the fact Eberhard had in fact resigned.”

The 22-page suit is followed by 143 pages of exhibits, which include 31 news stories and blog posts in which Musk is identified as the founder of Tesla Motors or Musk allegedly makes disparaging remarks about Eberhard. They include a Wired magazine interview with Musk on Jan. 4, 2007 that states “[Musk] has created Tesla Motors and Space X,” Musk’s aerospace startup.

So what about the car that Tesla allegedly wrecked?

Eberhard claims he was to receive the first Roadster to roll off the assembly line, but Musk allegedly insisted it was his. The suit says Eberhard agreed to take the second car — which he says would be worth far less as a collectible — and got the deal in writing, only to see Musk allegedly sell the car to a friend in February, 2008.

At about that time, Tesla allegedly told Eberhard his car was on its way but would have to undergo “endurance testing.” Several months later, according to the suit, Eberhard learned an unnamed Tesla employee “had driven Eberhard’s Roadster into the back of a truck, almost completely totaling the vehicle.” The damage was so bad, the suit states, that the car “required the replacement of no fewer than 75 different parts.”

Eberhard finally got his Roadster on July 19, 2008.

Source: http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/06/eberhard/

Tags: Elon Musk, Martin Eberhard, Tesla, Tesla motors, Tesla Roadster, Global Best Practices, Defamation, Libel, lawsuit, Zeev Drori,

Posted via email from Global Business News