Oranges and Apples

"Our equivalent of the Asian tsunami, in terms of the damage and the numbers of people that can be killed."
-Ivor van Heerden, director of the Louisiana State University Public Health Research Center in Baton Rouge

By now you've probably all heard about the devastation of New Orleans. Over 80% of the city is underwater and perhaps thousands are dead. Yes, I believe this is a tragedy, but for people (journalists and politicians alike) to compare this to Hiroshima or the tsunami that hit Asia is not only inappropriate but not comparable at all. How typical of American journalism to try and build hype and hysteria to their stories to make them sell.

Just speaking death toll-wise,
Hiroshima: 80,000+
Tsunami: 110,000+
Katrina: 1000+
1 American death does not equal 100 foreigner deaths.

This is not to say that I don't feel sorry for the people that had their homes, jobs, and possessions completely destroyed, but you've got to admit that many of the deaths were from sheer arrogance and pride. The governor of Lousiana had issued evacuation orders, and yet some people thought, "Hey, I'm smarter than the man!". How ridiculous is it when you have so many preventable deaths? Hiroshima and the tsunami weren't exactly predictable. I don't think anyone could have anticipated the amount of damage and loss of life those events have caused. On the other hand, Katrina had formed weeks ago and warnings were issued. It's strange how some people would gamble with their lives without cause.

What's my problem? Journalism seems to be leading a bit to sensationalism by trying to draw parallels to history defining events without thinking through all the facts. Katrina is NOT the bombing of Hiroshima, or the Tsunami of Sri Lanka.

Don't sell fiction and pass it off for news. Don't try to create ridiculous and outrageous fanfare just so that people notice you because it ends up coming off as a cheap attempt at publicity.

On a side note: With all the devestation, you'd think the human spirit would rise to the occasion to help others. Instead, you hear of chaos, anarchy, fighting, looting, and rape in New Orleans. A reflection of the American spirit without control? I hope not...

Speaking for Others

Controversy stirs the masses. It gets people talking, thinking, and debating about the issue. So one person can create a movement, but what happens when this movement can massively persuade others to do evil?

If you haven't heard already, Pat Robertson decided to endorse an assassination of Hugo Chavez. Yes, I think Chavez is not exactly someone we want doddling around with oil, guns, money, and terrorists, but where does Pat Robertson get the idea that he can issue his own 'fatwa'? I didn't think Christians even made edicts like that, but it sounds like someone's getting a little to extreme for me. I certainly hope it's not some new religious cult called Extreme Christianity or something (I think it's already called Islamic Extremism?). Fighting the enemy shouldn't include becoming the enemy.

I'll say one thing though, you got everyone across the globe listening to you. Not sure it's the most effective way in getting people to tune in to your show. That's about as unethical as you can get for marketing your show and your religion.

Just to clarify, Christianity does NOT endorse assassinations, killing, nuking, Pepsi, or Coca-Cola for that matter.

Products, Tie-In's, and Crossovers, Oh My!

I'm a comic book geek. Yes, I still get laughed at, but isn't being a geek a bit more mainstream now? I can only hope.

One of the things in the comic book world that have either made the community groan or rub their hands in excitement is the crossover or huge saga tie-in. Currently, the two big comic book companies (namely DC Comics and Marvel Comics) are having their huge title tie-ins respectively named "Infinite Crisis" and "House of M".

Essentially what they do is have a plot line that includes their best-selling titles and characters and even a few of the smaller ones. Obviously, the point of this is to increase sales by giving readers an inticing reason to buy not only their main titles but the lesser known or limited series titles as well. The stories and titles are intertwined in such a way that in order to follow the plot properly, you'd have to purchase titles that you perhaps may not regularly buy.

Of course this probably isn't as as easy for regular consumer products, but there are some simple concepts you can get out of this example.

• Give a reason for people to try the other smaller products (either new or underperforming ones).
• Give benefits of buying both the main and spin-off product.
• Get people excited about the tie-in of multiple products together.

Let's just use an example here

Lets say Coca-cola is launching a new Coke product (say Coke Kick - A heavily caffinated cola). They hold an online contest where they register online with code numbers from Coke product labels (such as their iCoke.ca campaign). However, instead of having each code number being able to win, you split them into two types. One for Coke general products and one for Coke Kick. In order to win anything, you must get a registration number from both a Coke product and Coke Kick. It can be a drawback that people are required to make 2 purchases to enter, but at the same time, it forces people to at least try Coke Kick and build an awareness of the product.

Is it feasible? Will it work? Maybe not, but hey, it's an idea.

Consumer Misconceptions

It wasn't until I watched Car/Business on CTV, that I realized how important it is to find out the myths surrounding a product. Of course it's always important to dispel the myths or misconceptions, but being able to discern what these misunderstandings are can be a harder task.

The segment on Car/Business was talking about the engine behind the Toyota Prius Hybrid and how they were partnering with competitors to improve hybrid car technology and advance the industry as a whole, and dispel some myths. I'm not a car junkie, but the last I heard about hybrid electric motor cars, you have to plug them in. Run out of juice and your car runs like a regular car. Correct? Apparently not so. Surprised as I was, I realized that most new technologies live under whatever stereotypes established by their initial introduction.

When marketing new technology it's always important to understand and administer:

1. Advantages - What does this mean for the industry or your technology in particular?
2. Disadvantages - What are the direct disadvantages of your technology?
3. Customer Reservations - What's preventing them from buying your technology?
4. Dispelling the Myths - What have you done to change the disadvantages and does the consumer KNOW about these changes?

What a Wicked Web We Weave

Oh poor misguided Rockstar... You tried to squeeze it by and lie about it, and now you've got a crap load of problems to deal with. If you haven't already heard, Rockstar Games, maker of the popular title Grand Theft Auto series, is being investigated for having a hidden sex game in their software (unlocked by an extra download). They've had their ESRB rating booted to Adult, and now have to work with developing a new version that's as clean as GTA can be.

Fallout from this is going to affect their sales, their publisher, and most likely the gaming industry as a whole.

1. Don't push the envelope. The Grand Theft Auto series was always on the borderline of being "Adult-only" but despite that, did very well in sales. Last thing you need is to push the product overboard to the point where retailers won't even sell it. I'm sure development teams were all aware of the "Hot Coffee" mod, because it's not a complete re-coding of the software, it's just a simple unlocking feature to an Easter Egg program already residing in the software.

2. More lies, less credibility. It's nice to try and cover your tracks with excuses that are semi-plausible, but the fallout disaster only increases with the more lies that are uncovered.

Let's be honest people, if you know the youth are your target and parents still tell them when to go to bed, they'll still watch what they're doing. They might overlook good ol' violence, but I don't think the masses are ready for simulated sex yet... They have enough trouble dealing with it in real-life.

Gay Marriage Must Mean Dogs Are Cats

I know this doesn't have anything to do with marketing, but I felt compelled to write something on this.

First of all, I'm a Christian. I don't believe that being gay is morally right. I don't agree with the lifestyle. This is not something up for debate, but I do regard them as people and people have rights, and I'm all for equal rights for everyone. However, I'm disppointed in the government's position in not listening to the majority democracy in even finding some way to amend the law, and I'm only going to be talking about the definition portion of this controversial topic and not all the juicy stuff like incest, splintered church groups, or gay rights.

Every person has the right to love and choose someone to be with BUT, the definition of marriage has always been "the legal union of a man and a woman".

Canada has decided to change that definition to be the legal union of a man and a woman, man and a man, or a woman and a woman. Take your pick. I would have rather called same-sex marriage to be a same-sex union or something else at least and have the same rights.

Let's say someone suddenly comes up to you and says "The Canadian government has decided to change that fact that all dogs are now cats legally under the law". Dogs have always been known as dogs, and cats have always been cats, but now the definition has changed and now we're calling dogs, cats. Messed up?

Regardless of the Canadian goverment's supposed stand on not imposing on relgious institutions, they've basically set the precedent in saying "Your definition of marriage must be revised. You don't have to like it and you don't have to take part in actually doing ceremonies, but that's what it is. Tough bananas." The goverment can now interfere with religious institutions, and I expect it will only increase. If a gay person attending some religious institution decides that he/she wants to be a cleric, priest, etc. and is denied, can they then file a human rights claim? Is the government going to interfere and say, your definition of a religious figure is wrong and you must let this person through?

At the very least, this definition will most likely get me into awkward conversations at cocktail parties.

Me: Are you married?
Man: Yes, I am.
Me: Oh that's great to hear. How's your wife?
Man: Oh, you must mean my husband.
Me: Err... I think I need another drink...

Design for Success

I'm always amazed at the designs people come up with for standard products. Apple has always done that with their products, but here's an interesting design for a keyboard that a friend sent me. It's a customizable keyboard but still looks very clean. It'll probably give me Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, but at least it'll look nice... in my room... that nobody ever goes into...



Sweeeeet! Prepare to be fragged while I'm pasting my head onto Brad Pitt's body in Photoshop.