Archive for June, 2009
The Human Printer
The Human Printer is a group of people who print photos in CMYK or B&W by hand.
(Via today and tomorrow)
A Series of Tubes
In the wake of the Iranian Election turmoil, YouTube and Twitter have gotten a lot of press as something more than idle entertainments. And while Twitter hasn’t changed up their game plan too much, YouTube is getting a little full of itself.
In order to assist the new generation of webcam-equipped witnesses, YouTube has launched The Reporters’ Center, a feed devoted to guiding and publishing the work of aspiring citizen journalists. They’ve got …
Levi’s Go Forth
Wieden + Kennedy Portland has launched a new campaign for Levi’s, titled Go Forth, which draws on the brand’s heritage as the quintessential American jeans.
The Levi’s brand has been incoherent in the last few years, having lost the strong position it struck in the 80s and 90s. Much of its recent advertising – particularly BBH’s Dangerous Liason ad directed by Ringan Ledwidge – has tried to inject some …
the zombie economy
29 Jun, 2009 • posts i've written • 3 comments
There’s a great quick post over at HarvardBusiness.org on the zombie economy and Michael Jackson.
“If the world’s biggest pop star only made $12 million a year from his recordings, why would anyone make serious music? Where did the rest of the money go? Why, straight into record labels’ pockets. Did they make better music with it? Nope — they made Britney and Lady GaGa. And that’s how they killed themselves: by underinvesting in quality, to rake in the take.
That’s the big problem behind the zombieconomy. We don’t reward people for creating, growing, nurturing, or even remixing assets. We just reward them for allocating the same old assets.”
The zombie economy is a result of chasing hits, of short-sighted wins, and of course, greed. I know a few people that might argue with the Lady GaGa reference (it’s subjective and weak), but examples go well beyond the music industry. We’ve embraced scale to such a degree that we can no longer ignore its impact on our interconnected world.
Starbucks can topple governments by their decisions on which coffee beans to purchase. Wal-Mart employs over 2.1 million associates worldwide and touches far more up and down the food chain. (got more examples? leave em in the comments)
Neither of these companies, I believe, sought out to entrench themselves in the very blood stream of the global economy, but they have. And now their actions directly impact all of us – and ultimately, themselves again. It’s about a longer view than a quarterly earnings report. These companies now have a direct responsibility to invest in activities that contribute to the full eco-system, not simply to their margins. This responsibility extends far beyond advertising.
Like people, companies have to develop something akin to self-actualization – they have to do more with their actions than simply prolong their own existence.
