PSST, PASS IT ON: Whaddayou watching?

By the Keurig machines.  Over cubicles.  Via Facebook or texting.

Today, everyone wants to be first ‘in’ on the latest and hottest television show – whether viewercast on cable, Web, networks, YouTube or other talking animated media.  Now, PBS’ Downton Abbey is almost passé, with Monday Mornings and Girls vying for the lead [depending on what kind of viewer you are].  Or it could be seasonal sports events or reality show suspense, usually communicating the most recent iterations in the challenge or drama.

That yen to be vision-trendy started, critics and pundits insist, with HBO’s The Sopranos (though we contend it really caught on with Mad Men).  Or fueled by the amazing trajectory of YouTube, now calculating four billion hours of eyeballs a month. 

Whatever.  More important is the convenience of choosing to listen to talented artists and intriguing series at our convenience, wherever, whenever.  There, the thanks is due to all of the above:  Folks like Dustin Hoffman and Kevin Spacey and Maggie Smith vying for small screen opportunities.  The at-your-fingertips access of old-fashioned audiovisual media, on new-fashioned instruments, from smartphones and iPads/Nooks to, maybe, Google glasses in the near future.  And the prolixity of channels, with Netflix now challenging traditional broadcast and cable TV in the production of original content.

But the whispering about watching is what’s got us thinking.  It’s more than just a conversation insert, like “what did you do Saturday night?”  It’s grown to infuse and infect our activities – perhaps in generating content à la reality shows or creating a pastiche of the 1970s’ ad era in presentations.  It has, in short, got us talking and thinking, across generations, spanning cultures and attitudes.  It represents, in short, exactly the kind of ideas we might want to adopt for internal corporate dialogues, a way to help ensure our business messages go viral in the right ways.

“If you don’t stop watching the idiot box,” as teacher Mom and retailer Dad used to warn us, “your mind won’t develop.”

Not.

MALCONTENT ABOUT CONTENT

Pardon us while we giggle.  Discreetly.  With our hands placed over our mouths.

              About a year or so ago, the advertising and marketing world discovered the power of content, or, as an AdAge journalist defines it:  “… straightforward, practical, even non-promotional information that plays well on social networks.”  It’s trendy, newly fledged experts explain, because it’s everything that advertising usually isn’t, driven by quality and accountability.

              Examples of content include white papers, e-books, podcasts, Webinars, bylined articles, documentaries, photographs, among others.  Examples of content’s pull impact:  Blogs that increased the number of customer contacts by 600 percent.  Online guides which indirectly resulted in $2 million in sales.  There’s even a Content Marketing Institute (shades of PR, anyone?) measuring who’s playing in this space and interpreting what it all means.

              Today, journalists are in high demand as content strategists, since they understand how to infuse a goodly amount of information and stories into all different channels.   So are former magazine editors and contributors.  Public relations and ad colleagues are now squaring off about ownership – and, more important, revenues in this era of Big Content. 

              You can almost anticipate our next series of questions:  What happened to the corporate communicators, inside and out, who have, for many years, recommended the publication of thought papers, infographics, documentaries that entertain and inform?  Or top-flight designers, so accustomed to counseling clients about toning down the obvious “corporate sell job” in words and pictures?   Name any individual who works in the business of change and leadership; chances are they, too, advise that honesty is truly the best policy, and that content, not fluff, reigns.

              To us, all this content marketing is hype about non-hype.  Content, by itself, is a very welcome direction towards the real, the authentic, and the candid.  We applaud that wholeheartedly.  [And you’re right, our discontent is showing.]

WHY GOOD THINGS MIGHT (RE)APPEAR IN SMALL PACKAGES

Flash fiction.  AOL’s CliffNotes in comic video formats.  Retailers that gobble up high-end sale sites.

These three newsy trends all say small:  Fiction that’s usually less than 1,000 words.  Classics reinterpreted quickly for the non-reading public.  And designer duds at reduced prices for an hour or so. 

Thinking further, we figured out that packaging also ties the three together.  Which got us ruminating about the power of packaging inside corporations. 

Externally, we can all vouch for the impact of great packaging.  After all, CPG companies spend millions and more on product look and feel, the way it’s displayed on shelves, in aisles, and end caps, how it appears in advertising and online. 

As consumers, we’re attracted to bright shiny objects as well as cinematographically-challenging movies (Inception, anyone?).  Many of us, regardless of generation, are captivated by the speed of Internet search and purchase, not to mention the ever-changing possibilities of digital networks.  That, too, is packaging at its height, one of many time-proven ways to get us hooked into and using brands.

Rarely, though, do we ever get well-packaged communications as employees.  Here are just a few examples to trigger some thoughts:  For many and often legal reasons, communicating about benefits tends to be long and involved and simply not all that engaging.  In quite a few businesses, corporate announcements are often ignored or stored in e-folders for later reference.  Even major initiatives that bring good change to life don’t necessarily receive the kind of overall look and feel they deserve.

No, we’re not advocating good looks without quality content and well-defined metrics.   Nor do we espouse internal advertising-type campaigns that are glitz sans information, and lack in-depth analysis and use of WIIFMs, up and down the ladder. 

We’d like to continue the form-versus-function debate re communications:  Does it matter if the package is Tiffany blue or UPS brown?  Or, simply, that something worthy is inside?

PICTURE THIS

A comic strip in Bloomberg Businessweek – called The Joy of Tech - prompted a smile.  And some thoughts.

It’s clear that Americans’ love of comix has lasted for decades; today, it’s morphed into a major business.  Librarians now cite the rush to check out graphic novels – in the adult as well as kids’ sections.  There’s a great uproar when newspapers cancel specific strips – and, often, popular outcry re-institutes their publication. 

In fact, the preference for “whimsical drawings” (English for the Chinese manga) and bande dessinée (“drawn strips” in French) is almost universal.  Think Tintin and Astro Boy, just two of the world’s most beloved characters.

The big question (at least among educators):  How much should we rely on captions/word balloons and pictures for learning and instruction – at any age?   Many naysay the medium, claiming it oversimplifies content.  Others see no issues; anything that prompts more people to read is good.  Even the late and much-celebratted author John Updike championed it, saying publicly in 1969:  “I see no intrinsic reason why a doubly talented artist might not arise and create a comic strip novel masterpiece.” 

Given this background and our admitted sensibilities, we’re voting to launch (or continue, as the case may be) comix in the workplace. 

We’re not talking satirical, op-ed type of cartoons.  Nor do we advocate pretty visuals, without being accompanied by relevant content.  The pictures we’re seeing deal with how-tos, for one.  Like a new process to apply for internal jobs.  Or a visual preview of the elements of databases.  They can also relate stories – quickly and powerfully.  About culture, the way we do things around here.  About employee heroes and brand ambassadors.  [Add your great ideas here!]

Now we can just anticipate some of the reactions.  “Original illustration is expensive.”  “Our company won’t accept this kind of media.”  “It downgrades our efforts.” 

Nonsense.  All generations read and enjoy comix.  Many do their best learning through pictures.  It’s a true break from screen viewing and, yes, ponderous text.  As to the cost?  Ask your designer about adding an illustrative style to photographs using Adobe.  [Among other techniques.]

Japanese use manga to communicate about every subject imaginable, from romance to business.  Why not us?