Comments on: And now for a little perspective… http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/and-now-for-a-little-perspective/ innovate. integrate. ignite. Sun, 26 Dec 2010 00:26:01 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Wildfire Strategic Marketing | (3i) » Roll with it: life’s a journey, so is the Internet http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/and-now-for-a-little-perspective/comment-page-1/#comment-86769 Wildfire Strategic Marketing | (3i) » Roll with it: life’s a journey, so is the Internet Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:58:49 +0000 http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/01/and-now-for-a-little-perspective/#comment-86769 [...] Full disclosure: I’ve worked with Chris in the past and respect his contributions and perspective on the social media space and tools. I’ve also posted a thought or two about Jaffe on this site in the past (I enjoy his work for the most part and respect his expertise and risk-taking). And both Chris and Joe are my FaceBook friends. ;) [...] [...] Full disclosure: I’ve worked with Chris in the past and respect his contributions and perspective on the social media space and tools. I’ve also posted a thought or two about Jaffe on this site in the past (I enjoy his work for the most part and respect his expertise and risk-taking). And both Chris and Joe are my FaceBook friends. ;) [...]

]]> By: tamera http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/and-now-for-a-little-perspective/comment-page-1/#comment-7284 tamera Mon, 04 Dec 2006 17:10:40 +0000 http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/01/and-now-for-a-little-perspective/#comment-7284 Thanks Joseph, I had a wee bit of fun ranting, err, writing it. ;) I agree we need to challenge the status quo, and provocative (and true in many forms) statements, like the one you quoted above, can be a useful catalyst in a conversation surrounding innovation. Too many of us get weighed down by our own perspective, or trapped in the 'we've always done it that way' mentality. There are many ways to approach it, but generalizing the core issues in order to make a point which can be made in a more defensible way, can actually lead to the very people we're trying to reach tuning out. Speaking of perspective - the example of your Coke story and the origin of your title, vs. my take on it without the background, is a classic example of perspectives colliding :) It's funny how even your description of an intervention could be challenged on a practical level by those who believe you're forcing an intervention on them vs. engaging in conversation; when in actuality you're advocating for disrupting the behaviour of corporations for the betterment of the brand/ consumer. In terms of discriminating on where the video (or content) is shown, I absolutely agree. The medium should be agnostic and utilized as applicable for a given campaign, to reach a given consumer... one size does not fit all. Thanks Joseph, I had a wee bit of fun ranting, err, writing it. ;)

I agree we need to challenge the status quo, and provocative (and true in many forms) statements, like the one you quoted above, can be a useful catalyst in a conversation surrounding innovation. Too many of us get weighed down by our own perspective, or trapped in the ‘we’ve always done it that way’ mentality. There are many ways to approach it, but generalizing the core issues in order to make a point which can be made in a more defensible way, can actually lead to the very people we’re trying to reach tuning out.

Speaking of perspective – the example of your Coke story and the origin of your title, vs. my take on it without the background, is a classic example of perspectives colliding :)

It’s funny how even your description of an intervention could be challenged on a practical level by those who believe you’re forcing an intervention on them vs. engaging in conversation; when in actuality you’re advocating for disrupting the behaviour of corporations for the betterment of the brand/ consumer.

In terms of discriminating on where the video (or content) is shown, I absolutely agree. The medium should be agnostic and utilized as applicable for a given campaign, to reach a given consumer… one size does not fit all.

]]> By: Joseph Jaffe http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/and-now-for-a-little-perspective/comment-page-1/#comment-7126 Joseph Jaffe Sun, 03 Dec 2006 12:47:39 +0000 http://3i.wildfirestrategy.com/2006/12/01/and-now-for-a-little-perspective/#comment-7126 I had to laugh out loud with your reference to TV. I had never thought obout it that way... The concept of "interrupting" (other than the literal interpretation) is what I describe as an "intervention" - the ability to disrupt the status quo and force an otherwise linear/predictable process/outcome to be affected and influenced by new and fresh variables (new marketing thinking and approaches) It was actually given to me by my Coke client who calls me an Interruptor. I guess it's ironic that the roots of the meaning can be traced back to the very worst practise of the 30-second spot. I guess I'll get working on that... :) Great post btw...generalizations are always dangerous (hell, it's exactly what the 30-second spot is all about), but at the same time I will defend the attack that the 30-second spot *in its existing form is either dead, dying or has outlived its usefulness* as an important starting point in any innovation and evolution conversation. I ask every marketer this question: are you in the TV game or the video game i.e. sight + sound + motion? If the answer (which it always is) is the latter, then why discriminate WHERE the video is shown? This conversation can also be evolved from video to content (consumer generated, long form, original, branded etc) I had to laugh out loud with your reference to TV. I had never thought obout it that way…

The concept of “interrupting” (other than the literal interpretation) is what I describe as an “intervention” – the ability to disrupt the status quo and force an otherwise linear/predictable process/outcome to be affected and influenced by new and fresh variables (new marketing thinking and approaches)

It was actually given to me by my Coke client who calls me an Interruptor.

I guess it’s ironic that the roots of the meaning can be traced back to the very worst practise of the 30-second spot.

I guess I’ll get working on that…

:)

Great post btw…generalizations are always dangerous (hell, it’s exactly what the 30-second spot is all about), but at the same time I will defend the attack that the 30-second spot *in its existing form is either dead, dying or has outlived its usefulness* as an important starting point in any innovation and evolution conversation.

I ask every marketer this question: are you in the TV game or the video game i.e. sight + sound + motion? If the answer (which it always is) is the latter, then why discriminate WHERE the video is shown?

This conversation can also be evolved from video to content (consumer generated, long form, original, branded etc)

]]>