Steve Jobs - 1955-2011

It's a little strange: feeling so close to someone you've never met. I've read countless tweets, posts and articles all expressing much of the same sentiments -- that Steve was a genius, a leader, an innovator, a risk-taker, an admirable human being that throngs of people felt intrinsically connected to.

I've had the misfortune (or fortune depending on how you like to see the glass) of experiencing a lot of loss and heartache. That's part of my personal story. But your perspective becomes markedly different when a community of strangers suffers a loss together.

In Canada, Jack Layton was taken from us in August -- by Cancer. Steve Jobs suffered the same, horrifying fate. To be stripped of your life by something so cruel and unforgiving is equally as unbearable to experience as it is to watch, I think.

I recall the announcement of Steve's resignation -- walking into work the next day, I was inundated with everyone's thoughts, both business and personal. I'm your quintessential Machead and have never hid it. Steve said that if he felt he could no longer perform at his standard as the head of Apple he would step down, and when he did we could all almost hear the ominous clock counting down.

It hasn't sunk in for me yet. Reading through everyone else's personal stories about how Steve inspired them, about how Steve was the only reason they were who they were today, about how Steve had irrevocably changed the world showed me how deeply rooted he was in people's lives. He wasn't just a businessman or a technologist.

Steve is no doubt a legend. And I believe he's one of those indescribable people we will hold in high reverence always.

As my jaw dropped when I read that first tweet from Forbes on Wednesday, October 5 announcing his death, I could only think how sad it is to lose. But I remind myself always how much sadder it would be to never have had at all.

Goodbye Steve. And to those of you staring hardship and loss in its dark, bottomless eyes, remember him, because he took his "3 months to live" sentence and transformed it into 7 glorious years of incomparable global impact.

When I speak about sustainability, I am focusing in on two particular areas. One is the sustainability of the medium as an effective marketing channel and how it fits into a successful marketing strategy. The second looks at social media as a career choice.

I'll admit I follow LinkedIn Jobs, job boards, and communities -- it gives me a sense of what organizations consider important and relevant in today's business world. How do marketing jobs fare? Is there a particular skew in speciality? In what areas are companies looking to hire most?

Inevitably, the trend I've witnessed has been the growth of what is now coined the 'Social Media Bubble'. And I will contend that it is, in fact, a bubble.

From tweets to LinkedIn postings to emails in my inbox, for the past 12 months in particular, there has been a noted influx in demand for social media specialists, gurus and wizards! (Clearly, these companies don't realize that none of these individuals actually exist!)

But it sparked a question in my mind. As a member of the marketing -- and specifically these days the digital marketing -- community, is a job or career choice in social media a smart one?

My gut says NO. My instincts tell me that the bubble is real, that we, as marketers and consumers, are inextricably drawn to this massive, online, social media sub-world that is driven predominantly by a false sense of connection and community. Is that a harsh analysis? Most definitely! But, if we're being honest, very few individuals and businesses are doing it right or well.

The recent downturn in the American economy and its rather scary global market implications hint at a second recession. It's the last thing anyone wants. But I can't help having the feeling that if it were reality, social media would be the first thing to go.

It's risky and unpredictable. It's new and modern. It's a mix of controlled knowledge and an uncontrollable environment.

What all this points to is the crux of my post -- is social media our marketing saviour or does it lack the staying power to sustain itself well into the future?

People are bandwagon-jumpers. We love our trends and fads. We can't help it! But as a marketer I struggle with social media and how it fits into the mix. I cannot say I'm completely sold. And maybe that's something the Google Pluses of the world (and any other new social up-and-comers) need to keep in mind: the pitch phase hasn't ended yet, each and every one of them still has to convince me why it's worth my time -- professionally and personally.

And, on top of that, the industry needs to keep that bubble from bursting.

It can be daunting. Maybe you're an entrepreneur, small business owner, marketer, or non-profit. Or maybe you're just an individual. In any incarnation, you are either the brand itself or helping to build and cultivate it over time.

I always like to discuss marketing as the heart of a truly successful organization. The best of the best in the world (call them Fortune 500 or just call them smart) understand this intrinsically. They know marketing must not be accommodated but built from, through and around.

Part of marketing is the brand. And even deeper are all the components, nuts, and bolts that bring a brand to life.

I came across the term Brand Charter in an Inc. article about maintaining brand consistency across product lines (highly intelligent read). It was a term I hadn't heard of before, but I instantly gravitated to the idea of a charter that wholly integrates all aspects of the brand.

Components of a Brand

Brand / Brand Identity -- the name, logo, sign, slogan and/or design that relates the key differentiating components of a product or service

Brand Personality -- the differentiating factors as related through relevance, esteem, value and humanization of the brand (often highly debated term)

Brand Message -- the communication of the brand via creative and consistent messaging across all media channels

Brand Promise -- the proposition of what the brand intends to deliver to the target audience

Brand Recognition -- the awareness of the brand in the marketplace

Brand Perception -- how the target audience understands and relates to the brand, whether positive or negative; it defines the brand's reputation in the marketplace

Brand Loyalty -- the target's allegiance or commitment to the brand as demonstrated by willingness to repurchase and advocate for the brand

Brand Equity -- the value added to a product or service via association with a well-known brand

The Brand Charter

There are a variety of subtleties in the terms I've outlined above. This is where things get muddy and confusing and complicated. But what you should be taking away from this is that these components must work together and feed the same purpose.

They encompass the Brand Charter which is, in essence, the overarching strategy, purpose and objective of the brand. It is why it exists, what it exists to achieve and how it communicates that to the target audience.

It is vital to note that a brand is not just a logo or a slogan or a name (these embody the visualization of the brand) -- a well thought-out brand is clear, relevant, consistent, and engaging across all points of contact.

What the Brand Charter is for me is the ideal place to start. It is where a brand can germinate and be born. You start at the base, build the strategy, and then give the brand a voice, an image and a message.

You put it down in writing. Those words will breathe life into the brand and, like any charter, constitute the founding principles and function of the entity being defined. The Brand Charter is meant for definition, future reference and ongoing brand evolution.

Don't shy away, embrace the brand. And make the branding process a core part of your marketing.

But if you're a woman, looks like milk can do a whole lot more.

Finding yourself down in the dumps on a monthly basis? Cramps, bloating and irritability affecting your life? Well, apparently milk can help with all that -- it's the new cure-all for PMS (premenstrual syndrome)!

And to help you out, The California Milk Processor Board has launched a 'Got Milk?' PMS campaign with agency, Goodby, Silverstein & Partners:

Honestly, if you're a man and you attempted this, I feel sorry for you! Not a smart move!

I hope you're thinking this campaign is fantastic: it's edgy, controversial, and modern. Well, if you are, looks like you're in the minority this time.

Got Milk?'s PMS campaign seems to have suffered from its own symptoms of crabbiness and irritability having been pulled early amid unfavourable reviews. According to Adweek, the campaign was set to run until the end of August, accompanied by a website originally titled EverythingIDoIsWrong.org.

The website has now been redirected to GotDiscussion.org with a slew of all the negative commentary about the campaign posted directly on the homepage -- a great PR choice for today's online landscape.

Creative is controversial

From a marketing viewpoint, I commend their tenacity to take such a risk. However, when Steve James of the Milk Board told The New York Times that "It certainly wasn't our intention to offend people. We regret that. No question, with some people we have stepped over the line. We certainly misjudged the heat generated by the people who thought we stepped over the line." I call a huge, massive, honking BLUFF!

There can be no way this Creative wasn't meant to incite controversy. At its very core is a highly sensitive, often negatively stereotyped topic that both men and women misinterpret and misaddress on a regular basis.

If you're going to take the risk, if you're going to be controversial, then at least have the cahones to stand by that choice. A bit of backlash and the campaign is pulled -- that shows weakness and it also colours the client as being misinformed and unaware.

(But I guarantee that they knew!)

What about the women?

On the other side, it's about the audience (not the marketing or the client). I'm a woman. I understand the intricacies of PMS. I also understand how it is manipulated, humiliated and given an ugly face by the media, by both genders, and even by medical professionals. Just watch a tampon ad with uber-happy, twirling women in white skirts -- it's a joke! Menstruation has become a joke.

But are you really offended?

So would I call myself offended -- perhaps slightly. Mainly because I've seen this happen so many times before: take aim at the easiest target (however benign or malicious your intent) and something will stick. The campaign has created buzz, hasn't it? But I certainly don't think any Milk board wants women second-guessing their purchase decision in the supermarket based on some miscalculated flub.

After all, we know that women hold the decision-making power for the majority of household purchases, and that definitely includes groceries. It's important to keep those with power happy. (Even more important to not be sexist.)

Perhaps more so, though, I am offended by the California Milk Board. Were they coerced to run this campaign? Coerced into handing over thousands of dollars? Coerced into offending more than half of North America? If so, my condolences. If not (which is where my money would lie), then please make good and own up, don't pull the campaign and cite innocence and ignorance. If you're going to anger now and apologize later, then you've already lost.

Your coworkers, friends and twitterers might be suffering from "G+ Syndrome". Let me explain...

Google recently announced another attempt to get social networking right with the introduction (via limited test invite only) of Google+: its real-life sharing project.

With a number of failed attempts laying shame to the Google superpower, Google+ aims to forget the days of Wave (and if we're lucky Buzz!).

Early adoption (though limited with an invite-only model) has been phenomenal, with numbers of 10-20 million users floating about! Can this be an indicator that Google has finally gotten it right? Or is it simply a reflection of a tech-savvier conglomerate that's willing to jump the gun to try something new and shiny online?

So who gives a flying squirrel about Google+? Why should you spread yourself even thinner and add yet another social network to your roster? Honestly, I don't know! I'm not particularly partial to learning a whole new interface, a new way of sharing, a new way of connecting online. There's a theme here: it's reinvention. Reinventing what you already do online (surf, share, connect) to make it easier, funner, cooler! But I imagine Google wouldn't call it reinvention, they'd call it rethinking or retooling -- a simpler way to take your life and transpose it online.

I'm a digital nut -- it's what I live and breathe. So I got a little giddy at the clean interface and the "fancy" terminology: Hangouts, Sparks and Circles, oh my. Though, admittedly, it sounds like I'm in a kindergarten classroom and we're about to learn how to colour in the lines!

And yet with all its innovation (and, yes, I do believe it to be innovative) and the perfect positioning of making the network "you-focused", I still wonder the same question I've always struggled with when it comes to social media and social networks: How will it all come together?

Do I now have to choose between a Google+ post, a Facebook post, a Twitter update and a LinkedIn status change? Does each get its own dedicated time slot in my already filled-to-the-brim day? Do I pick one or two and say screw the rest? Or do I find that perfect aggregator that lets me manage them all, making my life easier, but ultimately diminishes the real value of each network itself?

Where I think Google will succeed is with sharing, conversation and engagement. It's easy to +1 something or share a great news story, funny pic or blog post. It's easy for me to make a comment on another's post and build a relationship. It's easy to get involved. For whatever reason, it feels comfortable. And comfort is not easy to create online.

I'm rooting for Google -- they may just have something here.

The Jungle Book - Penguin Audio Book Ad	The Wizard of Oz - Penguin Audio Book Ad
The Pied Piper of Hamelin - Penguin Audio Book Ad

I most certainly understand the connection between the creative and the message -- with these audiobooks, the characters will literally crawl their way through your ear, enter your mind and awaken your imagination!

However, the highly anatomical creative approach has (hopefully unintentionally) layered onto it an understandable case of mistaken identity. At face value, yes the body part depicted could very well be that of a human's ear canal but there is another, less child-friendly, male body part that also comes to mind!

With that said, I do love the texture and colour palette of the ads. Since the subject matter is classic children's literature, the subdued tones and almost-rough texture definitely allude to an older but no less venerable time in literature.

Details on where these ads will appear -- both geographically and in which publications -- are unavailable, but I would be very surprised if they made it to the North American market. Angry parents armed with words and acts of outrage instantly come to mind...

(The ads were created by Y&R.)

If you're like me, maybe you screwed up your face a bit, tilted your head to the right and said, "well, obviously the top one is older." Oh boy, how wrong we both are!

In truth, the former is actually the redesigned logo launched this month from Marketing, in tandem with a revamped print magazine, website and mobile-friendly site.

I have to admit, I don't get it. The June issue touts a discussion of the process and inspiration behind the redesign to go up "this month" online by editor-in-chief Tom Gierasimczuk and art director Peter Zaver. When this month, I know not, but I spent more than a few minutes searching and came up empty-handed.

The look and feel certainly hearkens back to a previous era, evoking older, more traditional brand values -- ultimately, heavily juxtaposing, in my opinion, the modern style of the former logo (seen in black above). Does anyone else feel like we're moving in reverse?

But, as with any brand, I'm willing to hear the case, the reason, the motivation. I eagerly await Tom and Peter's "discussion" regarding this redesign. It definitely warrants an explanation, but the sheer fact that it does leaves me a little disappointed. If the logo has changed so dramatically, then so must have the brand as a whole -- this is why I'm calling it a rebrand, while Marketing has positioned it as a redesign instead, semantics = power!

I feel left hostage at this point. Both wanting and needing an explanation, for them to justify the shift. So, I wait patiently -- having not yet received that explanation in either the print version that launched the new logo or online. But if you're a half-decent marketer at all, you should not only be asking "Why?" but also "Why not?".

Wait a minute!

Haven't I seen this commercial before? Oh yea, I liked it better in it's original form and brand: OLD SPICE!

Stop the knock-off advertising please -- though imitation is the greatest form of flattery, in this instance, it starts off being minutely cute but ultimately ends as disrespectful...

Did he just hold that door open for you? Did she just make you a copy of that report? Did you just ask for another rush project?

Marketing is a demanding industry. Everything is urgent. And nothing is ever early.

'Please and Thank You' are part of my daily mantra. I never forget them, their omission is never an oversight and, conversely, their inclusion is always deliberate.

These simple words mean courtesy and respect. They demonstrate that you're thoughtful and aware. Also, these make you a great marketer because they translate into being both detail-oriented and big-picture-inclined.

Everyone deserves to be asked politely and appreciated accordingly.

This includes you, your coworkers, your employees, your partners and your customers.