The River » Current Affairs http://the-river.net The personal professional blog of Pamela Parker (Caird) -- musings on marketing, advertising, media and technology. Thu, 19 Jan 2012 23:23:17 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Doing good… socially http://the-river.net/2010/01/15/doing-good-socially/ http://the-river.net/2010/01/15/doing-good-socially/#comments Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:06:48 +0000 Pamela Parker http://the-river.net/?p=564

The disaster in Haiti has reverberated through the social networks. Personally, I found Twitter, Facebook and even some e-mail listservs dominated by calls for donations. Information — some of it true and some of it false — spread like wildfire. Text 90999 to donate $10 to the Red Cross. Text 501501 to donate $5 to Yele. One blogger decided to donate ten cents per comment on a charity-related post, leading others to discuss (and decline) doing the same.

One side of me thinks it’s fantastic. Social media is being harnessed to help people desperately in need. (Also, the general public has figured out how to text message, and the carriers are actually helping.) What could be bad about these developments? Another side of me finds the social media environment a bit distasteful. Can’t we do good things without bragging about them publicly? Can’t we donate to charities without asking others to support the exact same causes? Shouldn’t we all just do what we can, in our own way?

This highlights the less-pleasant side of social media. While we’re all in a great big conversation, all in this together, there’s also the undeniable whiff of competiton in the air. Who is doing more for Haiti? Who cares the most and has the most influence on others? What blogger isn’t doing what he/she should?

Ultimately, the good here outweighs the bad — money is going to good causes to help those desperately in need. Whether social media participants are acting out of genuine empathy, or the desire to raise their own status matters little. The only danger is that the status-seeking results in negative feelings, meaning some who would have donated, won’t, or won’t donate as much as they would have, otherwise. Hopefully that won’t happen very often.

]]> http://the-river.net/2010/01/15/doing-good-socially/feed/ 0 The Social Media Guru http://the-river.net/2009/10/05/the-social-media-guru/ http://the-river.net/2009/10/05/the-social-media-guru/#comments Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:58:16 +0000 Pamela Parker http://the-river.net/2009/10/05/the-social-media-guru/

Via elsua.net

]]> http://the-river.net/2009/10/05/the-social-media-guru/feed/ 0 The Making of a Next Gen Video Consumer http://the-river.net/2009/08/10/the-making-of-a-next-gen-video-consumer/ http://the-river.net/2009/08/10/the-making-of-a-next-gen-video-consumer/#comments Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:47:20 +0000 Pamela Parker http://the-river.net/2009/08/10/the-making-of-a-next-gen-video-consumer/

A few weeks ago, I got my husband to agree to cutting off our cable television service. See ya, Time Warner Cable. See ya, Time Warner Cable bill.

Reading about Fred Wilson’s thoughts on the subject (wow, that link is old and yet still valid), and hearing from @lieblink, it has long been obvious to me that the future of television-watching is digital and on-demand. Watching our household’s video viewing habits — a lot of Amazon On-Demand, some Netflix Instant Queue, a great deal of TiVo-ed kids’ programming, and some live TV here and there — I realized that, with just a few slight modifications, we could ditch the cable boxes and save $71/month.

The person for whom this poses the most difficulty (and he’s already asked me to call TWC a couple of times) is my husband. He’s fond of live sports and live sports news — some of which are actually available online, but he’s not accustomed to using these sources yet. For the kids and me, it hasn’t been a difficult adjustment, as there is still plenty of programming available with our new configuration.

Here’s our set up:


  • Analog TV set (vintage 2004 or so).
  • Digital to analog converter box
  • Amplified indoor antenna (“rabbit ears”)
  • Roku box for Netflix and Amazon On-Demand
  • TiVo for recording broadcast TV and a little on-demand (Series 2)

I’d love to have Apple TV or some other way to watch YouTube, Hulu, etc. on our TV, but we are getting along pretty well just now. The most challenging part, thus far, is when we hear about some kind of news event — a plane and helicopter colliding over the Hudson, for example — and want to turn on CNN or NY1 for the on-the-scene coverage. We’re trying to train ourselves to find something acceptable online. Wish us luck.

]]> http://the-river.net/2009/08/10/the-making-of-a-next-gen-video-consumer/feed/ 1 It’s also measurable now! http://the-river.net/2009/06/24/its-also-measurable-now/ http://the-river.net/2009/06/24/its-also-measurable-now/#comments Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:57:23 +0000 Pamela Parker http://the-river.net/2009/06/24/its-also-measurable-now/

Pete Spande at Continuous Beta says:

Media hasn’t become social. It always was. I talked about the latest Dukes of Hazzard episode with anyone who would listen in 1980. My mother sent me newspaper clippings all the through my college career (for example – don’t use Bean0, it is made with penicillin! [I'm alergic.]) The difference now is that media is social with SCALE.

The other big difference, Pete, is that social media — word of mouth, to use the old term — is now measurable. I used to get a lot of gaff at ClickZ for writing about word-of-mouth marketing, because, uh… what’s digital or interactive about that?

My argument was always that the advent of digital media, and user-generated media, meant that you can now see and measure what people are saying about your brand. You can analyze positive versus negative; you can take that feedback and improve your products. And you can participate in the conversation and affect what people are saying about you. Pretty damned cool.

]]> http://the-river.net/2009/06/24/its-also-measurable-now/feed/ 0 Signs of the Times http://the-river.net/2009/06/16/signs-of-the-times/ http://the-river.net/2009/06/16/signs-of-the-times/#comments Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:24:51 +0000 Pamela Parker http://the-river.net/2009/06/16/signs-of-the-times/

Images from my way into work. Four different stores with the same general message: Treat yourself! Sale! Up to XX% off!

image

image

image

image

image

]]> http://the-river.net/2009/06/16/signs-of-the-times/feed/ 0 Journalism and Business — not always strange bedfellows http://the-river.net/2009/03/26/journalism-and-business-not-always-strange-bedfellows/ http://the-river.net/2009/03/26/journalism-and-business-not-always-strange-bedfellows/#comments Thu, 26 Mar 2009 16:19:02 +0000 Pamela Parker http://the-river.net/2009/03/26/journalism-and-business-not-always-strange-bedfellows/

There’s an interesting piece today in Inside Higher Education that discusses Columbia Journalism School and its mandate to educate journalists to handle the tumultuous shifts happening in media today (both consumption patterns and business models). Among the changes proposed by Bill Grueskin, the former deputy managing editor for news at The Wall Street Journal and the school’s new dean of academic affairs, is a course on the business of journalism:


Though he acknowledged that the course would bridge the longstanding gap between the business and editorial sides of the journalism world, he did not think this would present an ethical problem for students. If anything, he said, it might help them in a market where some journalists have had to become entrepreneurs to find an audience for their work online.

“Most journalism schools have a historical aversion to teaching the business of journalism,” Grueskin said. “It, however, is incumbent upon us to show our students the [changing business] model. We’re not blurring the lines between business and editorial. The truth is, business considerations have always enabled or disabled journalism — more the latter than the former as of late. We’re not trying to graduate people to work in ad departments but those who can talk to those in the ad department.”

At FM, especialy in the author services department, this is a topic we deal with every day, and it’s fascinating to see my alma mater deem it worthy of study. I wholeheartedly agree.

P.S. I would love to be an adjunct professor for such a course.

]]> http://the-river.net/2009/03/26/journalism-and-business-not-always-strange-bedfellows/feed/ 0 Kids and the Economy http://the-river.net/2008/12/20/kids-and-the-economy/ http://the-river.net/2008/12/20/kids-and-the-economy/#comments Sat, 20 Dec 2008 13:59:15 +0000 Pamela Parker http://the-river.net/2008/12/20/kids-and-the-economy/

Two FM authors — Asha from Parent Hacks and Mindy from The Mommy Blog — weigh in on how to talk to kids about the economy — on CNN. I think they both did a great job, and I’m impressed with the quality of the Skype video. It’s great to see such talented bloggers cross over to bring their brands to video so successfully, as they did here and as they’re doing at The Momversation.

]]> http://the-river.net/2008/12/20/kids-and-the-economy/feed/ 1 Going to SXSW http://the-river.net/2008/02/15/going-to-sxsw/ http://the-river.net/2008/02/15/going-to-sxsw/#comments Fri, 15 Feb 2008 02:20:16 +0000 Pamela Parker http://the-river.net/2008/02/15/going-to-sxsw/

After all these years, I’m finally getting the chance to re-visit one of my favorite towns — where I did my undergraduate degree — and I’m thrilled to be attending SXSW Interactive for the first time. Yippee! So, if you’ll be there, too, let me know.

]]> http://the-river.net/2008/02/15/going-to-sxsw/feed/ 0 BlogHer, Day 1 http://the-river.net/2007/07/27/blogher-day-1/ http://the-river.net/2007/07/27/blogher-day-1/#comments Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:46:57 +0000 Pamela Parker http://the-river.net/2007/07/27/blogher-day-1/

So, if I don’t get inspired to blog here at BlogHer, I probably never will. Hmm…

What’s amazing to me — and, I suppose this reflects what BlogHer was supposed to be about, in the first place — is how broad and diverse the blogging world is. And this is largely just the female side. So heartening, really. And it’s so pleasant, and unusual, to be in such a huge group in which the standard introductory line is “what do you blog about?” This when the typical blog-related conversation with a “normal” person begins with “you know what a blog is, right?”

It’s obvious it’s my first BlogHer, isn’t it?

]]> http://the-river.net/2007/07/27/blogher-day-1/feed/ 0 Perhaps I’m missing something? http://the-river.net/2007/03/12/perhaps-im-missing-something/ http://the-river.net/2007/03/12/perhaps-im-missing-something/#comments Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:06:27 +0000 Pamela Parker http://the-river.net/2007/03/12/perhaps-im-missing-something/

So, President Bush is pushing hard for ethanol to help us “end our dependence on foreign oil.” But we’re only able to raise ethanol-producing crops — specifically corn — in such abundance because we’re dousing them with petroleum-based fertilizers. (Yes, I read “The Omnivore’s Dilemma.”) So how in the world does this idea work? Yeah, I know there’s switchgrass (I also listen to the State of the Union speeches, occasionally), but could we produce anything sustainably that would genuinely make a difference? Maybe I’m just showing my ignorance, but I’ve never heard this element of the argument before. Anyone know how this reconciles? Or does it?

]]> http://the-river.net/2007/03/12/perhaps-im-missing-something/feed/ 0