andrewteman.org

The Ebb And Flow Of A Reality TV Series

andrew — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 17:56:31 +0000

One could argue that The Real World New York, back in 1992, was the first major reality TV success story of the current reality TV era. One could also argue that it was the only Real World season, that even came close to portraying reality. Nearly twenty years later, The Real World is about as contrived and scripted as a so-called reality television show can be. Cast members have figured out how to parlay a role on the show into a few good years of E-list celebrity, and as such, all remnants of reality have gone completely out the window in favor of manufactured drama and plot-lines nudged along by savvy producers.

Now that’s not to say that the show in its current form is not entertaining (it clearly is), but there is no question that any realism contained within, has almost fully degraded. However, it seems to me that at some point along the way, the promised “reality” actually degraded so much, that entertainment value began to actually improve.

If I were to graph this out, it might look as follows (though the entertainment value line may come back up sooner and sharper):

And this doesn’t just apply to The Real World. Any show where one season’s viewers can be next season’s contestants, is subject to this same phenomenon. Some that jump to mind are Survivor, Big Brother, The Bachelor (um, “Bachelor Pad” anybody?), and American Idol (the tryouts mostly). Currently Jersey Shore is right on track with one season of semi-real “reality” and solid entertainment value, followed by a nice sharp degradation of each.

What Is Facebook Places?

andrew — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 14:13:38 +0000

No related posts.

Let’s Have A Coffee

andrew — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 15:10:31 +0000

I had the pleasure of meeting up with Matt over at CustomMade this morning for a coffee and chat about our respective companies, the internet, and randomly related things. On my way out, I was reminded how much I love doing this sort of thing; meeting and connecting with interesting people and just sharing ideas and thoughts on all sorts of things.

As such, I want to do this more frequently, and am thinking of trying to do a one-on-one coffee with someone new, every week. It doesn’t much matter who you are or what your background is (though online/product/marketing/digital/advertising types are preferred), but mainly that you are interesting and passionate about whatever it is you do.

So if you are up for grabbing a coffee (Espresso Royale on Newbury Street is my go-to spot), get in touch.

My Must Have Android Apps

andrew — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 17:35:17 +0000

This past week, I upgraded my Motorola Cliq (stuck on Android 1.5) to a shiny new Samsung Vibrant (thanks Brendan for the nudge towards this phone). Of course step one with this new phone, was grabbing all of the appropriate apps. Some apps I had on my Cliq but didn’t use, got left behind; and some apps that didn’t run on 1.5 (but do on 2.1), I picked up brand new for this phone.

Here are my immediate download/installs. In no particular order:

Advanced Task Killer – Crap runs in the background all of the time. This kills that crap.
Shazam – Awesome, and awesomely useful app for tagging music you hear while out IRL (in real life). I use this a lot when I hear a song and want to remember to download it later.
Foursquare – I am bullish on Foursquare. Anyone who knows me, knows that. You can even stalk me here.
Twitter – My old phone didn’t run the native Twitter Android app. This one does. I am going to try this over Twidroid for a bit.
Google Voice – I use my Google Voice number to handle all of my voicemail. Nice little app.
OpenTable – I love the OpenTable app. I use this frequently when I am out somewhere already and want to make a quick reservation for later in the day/evening. So simple and so useful.
Phone Flicks – Netflix doesn’t have a good native Android app. This is the next best thing for simple queue management.
StickyBits- Just grabbed this. Haven’t used it yet, but I LOVE the idea of this and the possibilities.
Delicious- I use this mainly for quickly bookmarking things I see on my phone, that I’d rather read on a regular monitor later.
Yelp – Crossed up with OpenTable, I can find a place, and book a place, on the move.
Pandora – Best streaming music app there is. I used to be a Last.fm guy, but I love plugging my phone into my audio jack in the car, and streaming Pandora.
Bank of America – BOA’s Android app is fantastically simple. Check balances, make transfers, pay bills, all on the move.
Facebook – Obviously. They just redesigned their app this week as well. Looks sharp.
Starbucks Card Balance – This is a unitasker app, but I love it. One tap and I know my SBUX card balance before going into grab a coffee.

Anyone have any more suggestions?

Unintentionally Not For Profit

andrew — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 13:37:35 +0000

Loved this. Via David Karp’s Tumblr.

No related posts.

Coin Operated Nothing Machine

andrew — Mon, 02 Aug 2010 14:30:41 +0000

Around the corner from our office is a small Chinese restaurant. And next to the counter of this restaurant, are some of those “Love Test” machines, where you drop a quarter in, put your finger on a little sensor, and find out what sort of lover boy (or girl) you are. Essentially, some lights flash and it gives you some obviously bogus read-out. Beyond some basic blinking-light mechanisms, there isn’t much going on here.

It got me thinking one day, that it’d be fun to have a machine like this, that quite literally did nothing. Or more specifically, didn’t even claim to do anything that would even be remotely of value to the user.

Rather than a machine that flashes and beeps at you under the guise of providing some love-test results, I’d like to create a little machine like this that merely asks you to deposit a quarter and then nonsensically flashes colored lights at you for 5 or 10 seconds, with no other perceived value beyond just the flashing lights. Maybe call it “The Amazing Flashing Light Machine“. The end.

I can almost guarantee, that this machine, placed in a bar, would make money.

Changing The Dating Game

andrew — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 21:25:25 +0000

Think about online dating for a second. Even if you’ve never done it, you probably know a little about how it works. You create a profile (the bait), and you basically start fishing. Most sites make you pay a subscription fee, and some don’t.

It’s all pretty simple, and it hasn’t changed in 15 years. More or less zero innovation in this space, save for a few nutty angles on the whole thing.

Over the past few months, I’d been thinking about how online dating could be made better. Or at least more interesting. And here is where my mind was going.

Online dating is pretty socially acceptable these days, but there are still a lot of people that have some trepidation about the whole thing. So how do you get around the social stigma that holds people back from getting into online dating?
I also thought about all of my female friends, who aren’t single, but who LOVE playing matchmaker and setting people up. How could you get those people involved? If you could get not just the single people, but ALL people involved (in the broaden-your-potential-market sense), the size and scale here gets a lot more interesting.
And in the offline world, the best way to meet someone, is to be introduced through a mutual friend. Someone that can vouch for both parties and clear that transaction so to speak. How could that trusted offline experience be re-created online?
Which led me to think about an online dating site, that was more of a “game” than a dating site in the traditional sense.
How could you introduce game mechanics whereby matchERS could be rewarded for successfully connecting matchEES?
And by making it a game, where the single people (or matchEES) were passive users that were being matched up by other users, rather than actively fishing, it seemed to take a little of the social sting out of the whole process.

ANYWAYS…

Today I stumbled upon an ad for “The Matching Game“. The ad simply showed me two pictures and asked me to click to vote if I thought these two people should date. Out of curiosity, I clicked through, and was instantly thrown into a very simple, very slick little voting interface that allowed me to vote on who I thought would or would not be a good match.

And after I voted on the requisite number of couples, my results were displayed, along with an indication of how well I had done in predicting compatibility.

I love this concept, and I am glad to see someone was thinking similarly about this.

Measuring Social Media Marketing

andrew — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:24:19 +0000

Just read a post on the HubSpot blog entitled “7 Reasons Social Media Is Bad for Marketing“. Though the title is a bit more incendiary than the article is (HubSpot is good at writing juicy headlines to draw readers in), there was one of the bullets that I thought was dead on.

Focus on the Wrong Metrics – A fan or a follower isn’t a business objective. Social media has enabled marketers to chase metrics that don’t impact their business. The reason for most of the discussion surrounding social media ROI is caused by measuring the wrong metrics. Reach, leads and sales should be some of the tangible metrics that are measured as part of social media marketing strategies.

Amen.

So often I hear marketers say things like “We’ve got a gajabillion Facebook fans!”, and when I ask “Ok, so now what?”, I receive a blank stare back. It isn’t just about collecting fans or followers, it’s about leveraging those open connections you’ve made, effectively. Extracting (and providing) value through that channel.

Whenever there are random numbers thrown around in our office, I always think of the exchange between Jerry and George in the Seinfeld episode The Little Jerry.

JERRY: Hey, guess what! Little Jerry ran from here to Newman’s in under thirty seconds!

GEORGE: Is that good?

JERRY: I don’t know.

Hey, I’ve got 40,000 Facebook fans! Is that good? I don’t know.

Full article here. Link via @pc4media

OMG! More Old Spice Talk!

andrew — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:17:21 +0000

This afternoon, Duncan and I were talking about the insanely hot little Old Spice campaign that is going right now, and it led to our discussing whether or not this viral success will be reflected in actual increased sales of the product. This led to our disagreeing about whether or not it is easier to re-position a brand, or to create a new brand.

Specifically, if you were P&G and had Old Spice, would you ditch it and start over, or would you try and re-create it?

Obviously Old Spice has had some well documented success in actually turning the brand around, so this particular example isn’t the best one, but it’s the current topic of discussion.

ANYWAYS, I was reading some older articles (pre-current campaign) about P&G’s efforts to re-position the Old Spice brand, and I thought this article was interesting. Specifically, how the Wieden & Kennedy used the perceived weakness (the brand is old and tired) as a strength against the new and hipper AXE line of products from Unilever.

Research aimed at the target consumer found something unexpected: the Old Spice brand’s legacy was a benefit rather than a burden. The reason was that younger consumers tend to seek out venerable products they perceive as cool because they are authentic; examples include Converse sneakers and Lee jeans.

“Previous generations loved Old Spice and had a more emotional attachment to it,” said Monica Taylor, an art director at Wieden & Kennedy who is one of two creative directors on the account. “I remember my dad using it; it was such a deep, rich brand.”

Mark Fitzloff, a copywriter at Wieden & Kennedy who is the other creative director on the account, chimed in: “If you put Nikes on your feet, you’re making a statement. If you’re using Old Spice, you’re not. Procter wanted to see if they could change that.”

“Our timing was good because this is a moment when everyone appreciates authenticity, when retro is not necessarily a bad word,” Mr. Fitzloff said. “So we can say, ‘You can either be authentic or trendy.’ ”

That also helps Old Spice, which has been around for decades, to sharpen its differentiation from Axe, which Unilever introduced in the United States only four years ago.

“They have a clean slate,” Ms. Taylor said of the Axe products, which also include fragrances, deodorants and body washes, “but they have had to invent a personality.”

To underscore authenticity for Old Spice, the campaign gives a prominent role to the brand’s original trappings and trade dress, including the cursive script logo, the clipper ship from the fragrance bottles and the vintage whistled commercial jingle. But they are treated playfully rather than reverentially, in a manner Ms. Taylor described as an “inside-the-joke feeling.”

For example, a print ad for Old Spice fragrance, featuring a 1968 photograph of the actress Faye Dunaway sprawled out before a roaring fire, declares, “If your grandfather hadn’t worn it, you wouldn’t exist.”

(full article here)

We could argue forever about whether or not repositioning is easier or harder than starting fresh, but there are probably lots of good examples to support both arguments and good justifications for each approach.

Yelp For Android. Design Fail.

andrew — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:51:16 +0000

I love Yelp.com, and I am also a big fan of their Android app. But after the most recent update of the application, I was really annoyed with their start screen.

What the hell do these icons mean?

The first time I launched the app, I had to click each one of the icons, just to see what it did. Really poor.