On Words and Business

One of the reasons I enjoy traveling so much is that I delight in experiencing local media–what stories lead the t.v. news reports or are above the fold on the newspaper; what kinds of ads are in the local magazines, on buses, or posters. Other than basic French, I only speak and read English, though, so I imagine my own meanings based on the word or two I may know, the graphics, or the product itself.

It’s fabulous to visit other cultures and see what works for them. I have vivid memories of t.v. news reports and free magazines in Japan, and of CNN Europe reporting the 2004 tsunami, and French variety t.v. show honoring Johnny Hallyday. I like to think that these experiences make me better able to consider my audience and communicate more effectively.

Do you find this is a side effect of your travels, too?

If you are like me, you read everything critically, even if you aren’t trying. Once I read something that doesn’t make sense, the rest of the article or whatever it is I’m reading isn’t worth the paper or bytes it’s printed on. Which is why I get so upset when I make a mistake–even after double and triple-checking.

It isn’t too much to ask that words be spelled correctly, are not their own homonyms, that grammar is basically correct, and that the piece flow logically from start to finish. Unless, it’s obviously a play on words or a deliberate mangling of the grammar.
Do you read things this critically? Does an apparent mistake negate the message?

We should all be so lucky as Netflix, and other services like it. By getting customers to rate likes and dislikes, they know exactly what we want and don’t want.

At first, I was concerned that as the number of movies I rated went up, the number of movies Netflix recommended for me went down. More choice is always better, right? Until I realized the beauty of the system. While the number of recommendations decreased, their relevance to what I like increased. And let’s face it, 209 movies will still take quite a while to watch.

If only this model could be co-opted for the rest of us so easily. Or is there a way for marketers and communicators to do this, and I just don’t know about it?

Why does blogging work in the corporate world?

After all, a blog is an online diary and, until recently, keeping a diary has been mostly a personal indulgence. The concept of a corporate diary is unusual in history.

So how does it work for the corporate world? Or maybe the proper question is…does it work?

I’m looking forward to cracking open a copy of Strategies and Tools for Corporate Blogging by John Cass. I wonder if the answer is in there.

Is it possible to love (or at least be really dedicated to) a blog? In what way does this medium even matter?

As E.M. Forster said in 1941, “The idea that nations should love one another, or that business concerns or marketing boards should love one another, or that a man in Portugal should love a man in Peru of whom he has never heard—it is absurd, unreal, dangerous…. The fact is we can only love what we know personally. And we cannot know much.”

Is this thought still true? (Was it ever?) And if it is true, have we simply expanded what we know personally or are we suffering a mass illusion about what is called social media?

Do you ever just get tired of all the information flowing your way? Or flowing past you? An unending stream of words, video, audio. It arrives on paper, over the airwaves, as bytes in your computer. And even if you’re very good at filtering, turning things off, and ignoring beeps, buzzes, and papers flying across your desk, it can still be a bit much.

So, I ask you, is there still room for long-form direct mail pieces, email, or landing pages? What is the balance between pandering to those who only want easily digested bits and acknowledging that many intelligent and even well-read people lack the time and patience to stay engaged with your message for very long? How much information is enough, and then too much, to get the point across to someone who has not yet committed to you or your message?