Analytics Strategist

March 14, 2009

reading notes : 2009 Digital Outlook

Filed under: Advertising, business strategy, misc, reading — Tags: , — Huayin Wang @ 6:04 pm

With six hundreds (in 5 days) tweets from readers of the 180 pages 2009 Digital Outlook from Razorfish, this report is certainly captured the attention of many working in marketing/advertising. It is an exciting read and I will share a couple of my notes here.

Clark Kokich’s introduction sets up the story line really well.  

The opening paragraphs went to the key point directly.

 “I spent the first 30 years of my advertising career focused on saying things. What do we need to say to persuade people to buy our product or service? How do we say it in a unique and memorable way? Where do we say it? How much will it cost to say it? How do we measure consumer reactions to the things we say to them?”

Now, after 10 years in the digital space, I find myself spending my time talking to clients about building things. What do customers need to make smart decisions? What applications do we need to build to satisfy that need? Where are our customers when they make a decision?”

He then described the new role agency need to play: ” .. it’s about the actual role they should be playing in setting business strategy, designing product and service offerings, delivering service after the sale, creating innovative distribution channels and developing new revenue models.”

These are great insights.  Ad agencies are expert of creative messaging – “saying things”; the new challenge is about shifting the focus away from that and go beyond. This is a tremendous challenge indeed, one that would require new skills and “deep collaboration between creative, technology, media, user experience and analytics”.

June 30, 2006

On Bullshit

Filed under: Business, Random Thoughts, reading — Tags: — Huayin Wang @ 3:55 pm

I read On Bullshit by Harry Frankfurt some time ago. It was a Sunday afternoon, at a Borders bookstore, and I was attracted to it by the very first sentence of it:

“One of the most salient features of our culture is that there is so much bulklshit.”

The second sentence is “Everyone know this.”

The book then tours me with its interesting mix of academic and satire style prose. The apparent seriousness has an undertone of absurdism.

A few pages from the back:

“Bullshit is unavoidable whenever circumstances require someone to talk without knowing what he is talking about. Thus the production of bullshit is stimulated whenever a person’s obligations or opportunities to speak about some topic are more excessive than his knowledge of the facts that are relevant to that topic. This discrepancy is common in public life, where people are frequently impelled — whether by their own propensities or by the demands of others — to speak extensively about matters of which they are to some degree ignorant. Closely related instances arise from the widespread conviction that it is the responsibility of a citizen in a democracy to have opinions about everything, or at least everything that pertains to the conduct of his country’s affairs. The lack of any significant connection between a person’s opinions and his apprehension of reality will be even more severe, needless to say, for someone who believes it his responsibility, as a conscientious moral agent, to evaluate events and conditions in all parts of the world.”

“The contemporary proliferation of bullshit also has deeper sources, in various forms of skepticism which deny that we can have any reliable access to an objective reality and which therefore reject the possibility of knowing how things truly are. These “anti-realist” doctrines undermine confidence in the value of disinterested efforts to determine what is true and what is false, and even in the intelligibility of the notion of objective inquiry. One response to this loss of confidence has been a retreat from the discipline required by dedication to the ideal of correctness to a quite different sort of discipline, which is imposed by pursuit of an alternative ideal of sincerity. Rather than seeking primarily to arrive at accurate representations of a common world, the individual turns toward trying to provide honest representations of himself. Convinced that reality has no inherent nature, which he might hope to identify as the truth about things, he devotes himself to being true to his own nature. It is as though he decides that since it makes no sense to try to be true to the facts, he must therefore try instead to be true to himself.”

So what’s the philosophical arguement he made in the book? Ask and you lost it.

June 29, 2006

books are too thick these days

Filed under: misc, Random Thoughts, reading — Tags: — Huayin Wang @ 1:53 pm

hint:

– Dao De Jing has about 5000 words

– (granted, there is bible, but there is only one bible )
other evidence?

– what % of books are never finished reading? and
– what % of people still reading books these days?

– what % of people reading books for the sake of writing books?

reasons?

– unconscious writers’ compulsive monologing syndrome
– trapped in the language maze

– feeding the appetize of auto-pilot readers

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.