All Posts By

Marijean

Time vs. Newsweek and the Demise of the English Language

By Media

I’m a fan of Newsweek. I have been a subscriber and avid, cover-to-cover reader of the magazine for about 20 years. In high school, my family subscribed to Time and given my choice of magazines in a doctor’s waiting room, I’ll choose the Time over Southern Living or People every time.

In 2009 Newsweek underwent a total redesign. It was jarring. The font is different. The editorial content is sometimes indistinguishable from the advertising. Some of my favorite features were dropped. The content seemed less newsy and more, well, editorial. We discussed the change at the dinner table. My husband, irritated by the changes, was tempted to drop the subscription. I’ve wavered. I’m a very loyal consumer and still enjoy the work of the staff and admire and respect Editor-in-Chief Jon Meacham.

It was with all of these thoughts in mind as I selected an issue of Time magazine from the airport newsstand last night as I awaited my departure. * (A Kindle user, and full-flight reader, I require non-electronic reading material for takeoff and landing). I made my way through the issue well beyond the pilot allowing passengers to use electronic devices. Having finished the same week’s issue of Newsweek recently, it was a good real-time comparison of content. Haiti was the cover story of each and similar news coverage throughout. I found myself enjoying Time, and starting to wonder if we could switch. Could we be Time subscribers and drop Newsweek?

And then I saw it.

On the second to last page, in an article about the Sundance Film Festival, there was the following phrase: “sneak peak.”

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Peek. Peek. Peek.

Peek – a quick look. Peak – the top, as in, of a mountain. Pique – to increase, or spike, as in interest.

BLAH!

I’ve often had to have the Peek, Peak, Pique conversation with junior writers, college students and the like but come on, a Time reporter (Steven James Snyder, I am not so much looking at you as I am your editors)? Unacceptable.

Incredibly, looking for the article online I am shocked to find that the typo is there as well — in fact, here’s a screen shot as proof, in case the error is caught and really, I hope it is.

How to Couch-Surf the Sundance Film Festival

How to Couch-Surf the Sundance Film Festival

Trust  me; my own children have had this very lecture. They, from a very tender age, have known the difference.

All right; people make mistakes – fair enough. And I certainly don’t claim to be perfect. I understand typos. But this one stopped me so cold in my tracks it helped make the decision easily.

I’m sticking with Newsweek.

*see the second comment below from SJS. I couldn’t leave that crappy sentence the way it was after THAT.

How NOT to use LinkedIn: Three D’oh!s from a Real Life Example

By Communications

I got a bizarre e-mail today.

“J. is a friend of  D. and noticed your profile on LinkedIn,” the message began.

“J. thought you were the type of person who he would like to have as a client one day.  You may not be in the market for any [fill in the blank – not what it said, but not giving away too much here] services at this time, but J. would like to tell you about what he does in case you need something in the future.

J. asked me to contact you and schedule an appointment to introduce himself.  Do you have time for coffee next week?”

Let’s review all the ways in which this is wrong, shall we?

1. J. didn’t reach out to me himself, he had an assistant to it, which leaves me wondering if J. would be too busy to provide the actual services he offers himself, as well.

2. J. was savvy enough to use LinkedIn to prospect, but NOT savvy enough to ask for an introduction through the social network via our mutual connection, which would have validated the relationship.

3. The e-mail was to “undisclosed recipients” which was a tip off to me that the assistant did a massive SPAM e-mail to several second degree contacts of J.’s — or, should I say, only those who seemed like they were the kind of people J. would like as clients.

D’oh!

Naturally, I forwarded the e-mail to D. who responded with “you’ve got to be freakin’ kidding me!” Turns out I was the second person to contact him with it today.

Linkedin FAIL.

I get it; times are tough and we’re all looking for ways to grow our business, but there are rules of engagement and if you don’t know what they are, you had better ask, before sticking your foot in it like this guy has.

What do you think of this guy’s approach?

Twitter: Why We Care What you Had for Breakfast

By Communications

cerealI can’t tell you how many times this example has been thrown my way, as a challenge to the relevancy and purpose of Twitter.

“I don’t care what you had for breakfast!”

“Why would I care what someone had for breakfast!”

Why breakfast? I wonder.

Of course the people tossing out the Most Important Meal of the Day with the bathwater haven’t experienced Twitter and so, I struggle to find the most polite way to tell them they have no idea what they’re talking about.

Of course Twitter users are tweeting about more than their bagels and schmear or their $5 lattes. But let’s say, for fun, that for a day, everyone on Twitter tweeted their breakfast. Now that would be VERY interesting to those people over at Dunkin Donuts. And to the mom and pop coffee shops in your town. And to Eggo and to the billion dollar breakfast cereal industry. If all those breakfast-interested parties were also on Twitter they could ENGAGE with those Twitter users and ask them why they prefer, say, Bodo’s to Panera, or Mudhouse to Starbucks.

But you don’t really care about what your customers are thinking, saying and doing, huh?

On a personal connection level, say I’m tweeting my breakfast from a local coffee shop and learn that someone I know via Twitter only is there, or on her way there and at last! We will meet! And a friendship that had heretofore only been online, is now in real life and that is why we care what you’re having for breakfast.

At Work? Watch What you Tweet

By Uncategorized

A groundbreaking ruling will be handed down by the Supreme Court this summer, when a decision will be made regarding the privacy of text messages (and other, similar content such as Tweets) created on company-owned devices.

I’d be surprised if the final decision on this is anything other than the rule that’s existed with e-mail — that if it’s on a company computer, it’s not private and your company has the right to access the information. Even though we all “know” this by now, or should, it takes cases like these to remind us there is never any real anonymity or privacy in Web-based communication — and if you’re using a company-owned smart phone or computer to conduct illicit communications, well, you are doing so at your own peril.

It will be interesting to see how the official ruling turns out.

Arrogance and the Social Media “Expert”

By Uncategorized

I eschew the term expert when talking about social media – preferring the term “specialist.” I don’t think anyone can be an expert in social media – with a field so new and ever growing and changing there are only specialists – people like me who devote lots of time and energy to staying on top of the game. I think there are people who are passionate about social media and the power it holds, but to call oneself an expert smacks of an undeserved arrogance.

A word about arrogance, though, as I acknowledge that those of us in this field have a certain amount of it. I argue that it has been necessary and it is an attribute that has grown out of a need to be absolutely convinced and convincing when sharing the benefits of engaging in social media for business. We are the self-taught forerunners of this field who have spent, in most cases, the better part of the last seven years defending the internet. We’ve had to stare down corporate leaders afraid to dip their toes into online waters and demonstrate beyond the shadow of a doubt that the benefits far outweigh the risks.

When most of us started in this area the word blogger was said in the same tone as cancer; bloggers rose from the pasty-faced basement dwellers to a chosen few who make millions and others who just make a difference. By definition, a blogger almost has to have some level of conceit to trust that their thoughts and online ponderings would be of interest to anyone at all.

I’ve been part of an audience of those learning at the feet of those who have taught social media in the PR industry, this guy, this guy, this guy and this guy in particular. They all have one mannerism in common – a dismissive shaking of the head when a member of the community begins down the road of denial (it won’t work! we don’t have time! we can’t allow our people to self-publish! we need control!). I’ve noted this move and truly don’t find it arrogant (although corporate leaders, uncomfortable still with this deep end of the pool into which they’ve been thrown most likely do). I find it admirable – and it’s that confidence, that absolute gut-deep knowledge that you’re right and you know what you’re talking about and can prove it that I believe I’ve realized for myself. Does that make me an expert? No, but I’m practicing that head shake for the next time a doubter is in the room.