Brindle Media

Archive for the ‘Branding’ Category

During 2010, the oldest Baby Boomers turned 64 and, no doubt, wistfully hum the Paul McCartney tune while the youngest boomer will celebrate their 46th birthday. It’s got to be pretty discouraging to those younger boomers that HR departments now consider anyone older than 40 to be over the hill.

The original name for this blog was Buzz4Boomers and its intent was to provide information was to serve a translator of information about new technologies and social media for those Baby Boomers who tend to be intimidated by change. One thing I know about myself is that I am not an early adopter. But I am fascinated by new discovery and tend to be optimistic about the future. So, I frequently find that I fall halfway between those folks who are always using the hottest new technology or social media tools and those who are at the other end of the bell curve.

My challenge is that I tend to be a dilettante with a range of interests that’s a mile wide and a base of knowledge that’s an inch deep. So a review of my blogs over the past couple of years shows diverse topics such as the story of my customer experience using social media in negotiating with a large chain store, rants about musicFirst and the Performance Rights Act, and stories about augmented reality.

When I evaluated my professional broadcasting career after I left the industry in 2007, I realized that what I really enjoyed most about my job as a program director and on-air personality was helping people find ways to cope with the challenges in their lives. That could happen when I was able to provide important health or consumer protection information during a public affairs show or by simply playing a song that provided a listener with a brief distraction, sense of joy or peace of mind.

My ultimate goal for this blog is to make you aware of ideas/ events/ discoveries that are impacting our world and that a reader might not have encountered in hopes that it will provide some assistance in coping with change.

This week was our wedding anniversary so I was in our local Saratoga Springs, NY Hallmark store looking for a card for my wife. While I was perusing their selection, I noticed a video display and was amazed to discover that Hallmark is embracing Augmented Reality.

Here’s a video posting from MommyReporter:

I first discovered AR last summer around this time and have been fascinated by its potential. Most people are still unaware of Augmented Reality but now that a mass appeal company like Hallmark is employing this technology, I expect to see a lot more market penetration for AR during the next 12 months.

Here’s a link for the Hallmark website:

http://bit.ly/86tjXH

Your thoughts?

Earlier this year, I showed you how augmented reality can be used as part of the clothes shopping experience. Now, YOUReality and metalio have created an Online Retail Visualization 3D tool to help you see how furniture, appliances, electronics or other accessories might look in your current living space.

And for your iPhone:

How soon do you think it will be before you start taking this type of technology for granted?

Have you ever been at a large event and become swept up with the crowd in the emotion of the moment? Have you found yourself choking up while watching someone cry on TV? Or have you suddenly found your mood lightening when someone enters the room in a happy mood?

Recent research has shown that the human brain contains something called “mirror neurons” . When we see or hear someone else experiencing an emotion , these “mirror neurons” cause us to experience that emotion, too.

I envy Robert Krulwich his ability to make science interesting.

Here’s my question. If your brain can’t tell the difference between whether YOUR body is doing something or instead you’re watching someone else do it, why would you put yourself through the stress of watching a horror movie?

Dr. Nick Morgan, author of Trust Me: Four Steps to Authenticity and Charisma , believes that by understanding the concept of mirror neurons you can become more effective in communicating your ideas to others.

And here’s some animation which does a great job of explaining how “mirror neurons” were discovered.

I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts about this research.

Just so you’ll know, I’m not employed by a radio station nor an individual or company which owns radio stations, I am not related to anyone who works in radio, and I’m not a shareholder in any company which owns radio stations. Although many years of my career were spent in radio, I am not a water bearer for any company which owns music-oriented broadcast radio stations.

That said, I find AFL-CIO President Rich Trumka’s remarks at a recent musicFIRST Coalition press conference on Capitol Hill pretty offensive.
Trumka said: “The reckless greed that drives Wall Street is the same as the unconscionable greed that drives the handful of conglomerate corporate radio executives that control 75 percent of our nation’s radio stations. If you care about music, if you care about the right of Americans to get paid for their work, if you care about doing what is right, be a part of the good fight for our performing brothers and sisters.”

“The unconscionable greed that drive the handful of conglomerate corporate radio executives that control 75% of our nation’s radio stations”? Nice rhetoric, Mr.Trumpka but what about the unconscionable greed that drives the handful of foreign-based record companies that abuse their relationships with their artists?

Lets review some facts. There are a little over 11,000 commercially licensed radio stations in America. Around 20%, of those facilities are owned by companies which control 100 or more stations. Clear Channel’s controls 11% and the remaining 9% is split up among 7 or 8 other companies. In other words, 80% of American broadcast stations aren’t owned by companies which Rich Trumka and musicFIRST could describe as “conglomerate corporate radio”.

Chairman of the House Labor and Education Committee, George Miller (D-CA) said: “The important thing to remember is this: Passage of the Performance Rights Act will stop corporate radio from continuing to exploit the labor of working Americans – Americans who spend decades passionately honing their craft to produce works that resonate with our inner angels.”

Chairman Miller appears unaware that these radio stations which he accuses of exploiting musicians are actually investing millions of dollars in air time to promote the careers of musicians and providing FREE commercials by exposing those artists’ music to the audiences that these stations have invested millions of their marketing dollars to aggregate.

At this point, some reader will ask: “But don’t those radio stations limit the number of artists and songs that they play and isn’t that unfair?”

The stations limit the number of artists and songs that they play based on what their listeners want to hear. Research has shown that most radio listeners prefer a limited number of songs on a station’s playlist. The particular songs may change over time but the aggregate number of songs remains relatively constant. It’s even been noted that iPod and Pandora users eventually limit their playlists after their initial enthusiasm for discovery wanes.

Although I’m no longer involved with the radio industry, I did spend many years programming stations and being “worked” by record industry representatives to increase exposure on those songs which were most important to their labels. Increased exposure meant and still means increased revenues for the foreign-owned record companies who are, to quote Chairman Miller, “continuing to exploit the labor of working Americans.”

If you’re looking for quality of life, new career opportunities and a place that’s stepping up to the challenge of change in the 21st century, consider New York State’s Tech Valley Region.

Saratoga is equidistant from Boston, New York City and Montreal. Winters aren’t too hard, summers aren’t too hot. If you like outdoor activities, you’ll like it here.

Learn more at www.saratogaedc.com

The way you think of and read magazines is about to change. Watch this short video about how Viv is creating editorial content for their digital-only magazine specifically with the iPad in mind.

Mashable reports that GM “has been working with several universities to develop a working next-generation heads-up display that turns an ordinary windshield into an augmented reality information dashboard.” The system could help drivers in conditions of poor visibility to identify things like road signs, the edges of roads, animals near the road, etc. and also go your GPS one step better by outlining the exact building that you’re heading to. According to General Motors, the system should be available in its vehicles in the relatively near future.

This week, the RIAA sent 5 people to the National Association of Broadcaters’ headquarters in Washington DC with a blow-up pig to protest NAB’s stance against the Performance Rights Act. NAB responded by sending them a sausage pizza.

Dennis Wharton, the NAB’s Executive VP says:”It’s no surprise that RIAA is now employing silly frat-boy stunts, given its well-documented practice of suing college kids to rescue a bankrupt business model. It also seems appropriate for RIAA to use an inflatable pig as its mascot, since its foreign-owned members would be the biggest beneficiaries of performance tax pork. RIAA is losing this issue on Capitol Hill and in the court of public opinion, and today’s demonstration represents a new low in a campaign of utter desperation.”

About the sausage pizza, Wharton noted, “We’re suggesting they provide this food to the scores of exploited musicians who have had to sue their record label to recoup allegedly unpaid album royalties.”

As music industry veteran Steve Meyer notes in his DISC & DigitalAudioTechnology (Music & Digital Audio/Video News):
“All the artists who have earned a whole lot of money from selling a whole lot of records from a whole lot of radio play should think twice before they try and get what they wish for. Because if the Performance Tax is ever passed, a whole lot of newer artists won’t have the same ability to make a whole lot of money from record sales because they will most likely not receive the same whole lot of airplay. But that’s my opinion.”

“Back to the RIAA and their lame brained stunt. Labels fund the RIAA, and they should demand the costs of the stunt be deducted from the salaries of all those in the association who thought it was a good idea to draw attention to a matter so far removed from the public’s consciousness. It accomplished nothing and it allowed the NAB to retaliate with words the public is more likely to side with.”

(Read Steve’s weekly newsletters at www.freewebs.com/stevemeyer )

I like the sausage pizza move and Wharton’s responses but, unfortunately, visuals tend to trump the written and spoken word with we humans so I think that radio broadcasters need to respond with their own creative and iconic visual to represent the greedy labels and those ungrateful artists who dismiss FREE promotion and advocacy of their work as having no value.

Any suggestions?

Note to MusicFIRST: In a survey of its readers the broadcast trade, INSIDE RADIO asked if the Performance Rights Act were passed would they consider switching their music-formated radio stations to talk, sports or news programming. More than half (52%) said yes. A third of those responding said that their decision would be based on the size of the royalty payments.

musicFIRST is at it again.

Yesterday, Dionne Warwick was in Washington trying to persuade Congress to pass the Performance Rights Act. According to Dionne, “This is a critical issue for not only those of us who have made music our careers, but for those who are trying to make a name for themselves in the business. Performers from every genre of music should be fairly compensated for their art. Thus far, radio is the only medium that fails to provide artists with fair compensation for the use of their music and we feel it is time for radio companies to join Satellite, Internet, and Cable music distributors in giving musical artists what they have worked so hard to earn.”

I’m sorry, Dionne but could we review your tax records for the past 45 years? I would suspect that a lot of money has flowed into your personal account primarily because of the FREE exposure and promotion you received from radio stations playing your songs in high rotations and on-air personalities reinforcing your brand by praising your talent. I’m sure that your contract with your record labels was designed more in their best interest than yours but that’s not radio’s fault. What all that FREE exposure on radio did for you, however, was increase audience awareness of your talent, increase your TV exposure, increase demand for your live performances and increase the fees you could demand for those performances. Seems to me that you profited nicely from all that FREE exposure.

And before someone posts the same lame comment about radio gets free use of our airwaves and we the people own the airwaves, it would be useful to remember that radio stations are granted short-term licenses to access those airwaves with the promise to operate in the public “interest, convenience and necessity”. Then, companies must invest millions of dollars in order to build their facilities, purchase the equipment, pay the electric bills (which can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars a year), pay the personnel (on-air staff, engineers, support staff, sales people, management), pay a large
percentage of gross advertising revenues to music rights companies (BMI, ASCAP, SESAC) and pay local, state and federal taxes. If times are good and the station does a good job of serving its listeners, it can earn a nice profit. If times are tight, it can lose money even if it’s doing a good job of serving its audience. So, saying that radio gets “free” use of our airwaves is a bit misleading.

It amazes me that the artists who support musicFIRST’s efforts don’t understand that if the RIAA gets its way and forces radio to start paying for the right to play songs then fewer stations will choose to continue playing music and those stations that do continue to play music will become more selective about what they play. If a station is paying for songs, its budget will dictate that it choose the most cost-effective tunes which will be obvious hits by artists with established track records. Consequently, playlists will become even tighter. I’m not sure that’s the goal that the musicians supporting musicFIRST are trying to accomplish.