Credit: AboveTheLaw.com

George Orwell’s vision of a surveillance society, laid out in his classic “1984,” is coming true.

But the surveillance isn’t coming from government — it’s coming from social media companies. And it isn’t being imposed on a helpless populace — it’s being welcomed by a society that in less than a generation has become completely addicted to digital communication.

I’m not being alarmist or paranoid about this topic, merely pointing out facts.

• Fact: If you use a smartphone, your service provider and the maker of your phone have a record of your whereabouts at all times — or, at least, the whereabouts of your phone.
• Fact: If you’re on Facebook, you’re allowing it to collect huge amounts of information about you, which Facebook uses to create ads and offers based on what it knows about you — and about your friends.
• Fact: Google, fearing that it’s losing ground to Facebook in the social-media revolution, is set to begin collecting and integrating information on you based on every Google service you use: Google calendars, Google documents, Gmail, Google searches, Android phones and more.

Google’s new initiative, just announced, is more of an ultimatum than an offer. You don’t have a choice of opting out. If you don’t want Google to know and use every bit of information about you, your only choice is to stop using Google services.

Google, Facebook and others offer these services in the hope of making your life more convenient — and the hope that they can make money by doing so.

The dream of Google and the others is to lubricate your journey through life, easing you along by virtue of their entrée to every action you take, every friend you interact with and every opinion you express in a digital forum.

In the new paradigm, you might get a friendly reminder on your Android phone from your Google calendar that you’re late for that 10:30 meeting in Eagan. Knowing that yesterday you sent your spouse an email via your Gmail account about buying a new sweater, you might get a coupon for 30 percent off from a clothing store located on the route that Google Maps suggests you take to the meeting. Later you’ll get an offer from a Mexican restaurant, because Google knows that one of your colleagues who’s going to be in the meeting did an Internet search on that topic the other day.

We’re addicted to the digital world. Do you doubt it? Just look around in any public place and see how many people are peering intently at a screen, whether on a phone, a laptop or a tablet.

The keepers of what used to be quaintly called “the information superhighway” know about our addiction. And, like any good pusher, they know how to extract more and more from us in return for providing what we crave.

So now Google has issued an ultimatum: Give up your privacy or you’re cut off. I predict that few will reject it. And can you blame them? Life in this country without Google and the services it provides would be slower, more expensive and more isolating for anyone who chose to go that route. For example, my clients often ask me to create a Google document so everyone on a project can share information. Can I really say “no” because I’m taking a stand against Google’s new privacy policy?

“1984″ is here, all right. But it’s not the product of a repressive central government. It’s the outcome of a digital revolution that enables us to gorge on information like a starving man at an all-you-can eat buffet.

And we have no desire to walk away hungry.

This is John Reinan’s weekly marketing column for MinnPost.com.

Is this our future? (Source: Catonett.com)

I needed some razor blades the other day, so I went to pick some up on a trip to the supermarket. I’ve been using a twin-blade Gillette razor for quite some time now, and it suits me well.

Surprise! There were no twin-blade cartridges on the shelf. Nothing was in that store but three-, four- and five-blade systems. The top of the line was the Gillette Fusion, a five-blade outfit that comes in both manual and battery-powered versions.

I probably could have gone to another store and found the twin-blade cartridges I needed, but who wants to chase around after razor blades? So I bought a four-pack of high-end disposable Gillette razors with three blades. I’ve been using them for a couple of weeks, and I don’t think they shave any closer than my old twin blades. Plus, with one extra blade, they’re bigger and less maneuverable. It’s harder to make them hug the chin line.

I’ve got to confess, though — I’m a little curious about the notion of a five-bladed razor. If you’re one of those guys who has a 5 o’clock shadow at 10 a.m., with whiskers like wire bristles, I guess it might be helpful to have a few extra blades scraping things. But for the average man, it really does seem like overkill.

But there must be something to the idea. Gillette’s website for the Fusion razor has more than 1,700 customer reviews, and the average score is 4.7 out of … 5.

So it looks like the The Onion successfully peered into the future in 2004 with “F#%$ Everything, We’re Doing Five Blades,” the classic satirical commentary from Gillette’s CEO.

More guys are responsible for household grocery shopping. That doesn't mean grocery stores need to go out and change things, though.

I confess, I love grocery shopping.

No, really. I enjoy the actual process of going to the grocery store, pushing a cart up and down the aisles under the bright glow of buzzing halogen lights, picking out my favorite staples, perusing the best deals, trying a new item or two. I enjoy bagging my own groceries, as I did for my first job at age 14. I enjoy going home and filling the cupboards and refrigerator with my haul.

Strange as it sounds, grocery shopping brings me a sense of accomplishment.

Last weekend, I read that I’m no exception at all, but rather a member of the fastest growing demographic in food retail. According to Emily Bryson York of the Chicago Tribune, more men are taking on the role of head grocery shopper in their household and marketers are taking notice:

“Experts say the trend has been building slowly for decades … The recession has hit men disproportionately with layoffs and left many of them home to manage the household.

 

“The nation’s biggest food and personal-products manufacturers are taking notice, attempting to market products and adjust store layouts to cater to men.

 

“It’s a paradigm shift for the $560 billion retail food industry that has patently referred to the primary customer as “she,” focusing marketing and advertising firepower on women, and mothers in particular – sometimes making fun of dads in the process.”

Some of the changes, though subtle, have already taken place among mega retailers. For instance, most Target stores now keep all men’s toiletries to a single aisle, so I’m not left to plod through the glut of female soaps, lotions, hairsprays, shaving cream, and, well, you get the picture. That just seems logical, though, and not an intentional reaction to shifting demographics.

Isolating personal care products by gender is one thing, but should these findings really transform the food retail experience?

In the story, Brian Calpino, vice president of breakthrough innovation at Kraft Foods, makes a wildly misinformed assertion that men and women shop differently simply based on gender: “The mindset has been that she shops, she really knows every inch of the store, she is really organized, has a list, is in a huge hurry … We talk to a lot of these millennial guys about shopping, and the biggest headline is they’re not as structured, not as hurried, much more experimental, more adventurous.”

My idea of being “experimental” and “adventurous” is buying Cocoa Puffs and chocolate milk. What’s this guy talking about?

Bryson York’s story cites two surveys that capture the surging male demographic in grocery stores:

• “Consumer-research firm GfK MRI and ESPN found 31 percent of men (18 to 50) nationwide the primary household grocery shoppers in 2011 – up from 14 percent in 1985.”
• “A nationwide survey of 1,000 fathers conducted by Yahoo and market research firm DB5 said early this year 51 percent were the primary grocery shoppers in their households.”

The increase in men took place as grocery stores were, I assume, constructed and arranged for the female shopper.

Don’t go a-changing, food retail. You’re great just the way you are.

One of my resolutions came about after I saw some numbers that really grabbed my attention given the state of our still-sluggish economy. The resolution? To stop spending money unnecessarily on fast food and beverages.

Over the years, I have developed the bad habit of visiting a fast-food joint at least once a day, whether it’s grabbing a sandwich from Subway or a warm drink from Starbucks. The disturbing thing to think about is the amount of money these little stops add up to over the years. Spending $4 or $5 here and there doesn’t seem like much, but when it becomes an everyday habit, those numbers add up to some alarming figures.

The killer part about this is these fast-food stops are completely unnecessary. It’s not like it’s hard to throw together a sandwich at home for lunch at work or to wake up five minutes earlier and make coffee at home. So what’s the issue then? I hate to say it, but sheer laziness and feelings of entitlement to these little “treats.”

After seeing how much money I’m wasting, I think I’d rather save the money or at least put it to better use. A $4-per-day treat from Starbucks sets me back $28 a week, about $120 a month and $1,460 per year. Do that for five years and I’m down $7,300, not including any money I may have earned had I invested my cash instead.

The numbers are even more absurd if your habit is lunch or dinner instead of lattes. No matter how you slice it, these overlooked, unrealized and unnecessary daily purchases could instead be going towards a car, a house, a dream vacation, college, retirement, charity, you name it! Just as quickly as those numbers add up for a latte a day, they will also add up for bigger and better things.

What is your biggest new year’s resolution? Do you have any bad habits you are hoping to kick? What are your thoughts on daily fast food indulgences? Do you think they’re necessary?

After pre-ordering two PS3 controllers designed for disabled gamers, a concerned customer emailed customer service, wondering if the controllers would be delivered by Christmas Day, as promised. What unfolds next, over the course of almost 20 emails, you have to read to believe. It’s that implausible. Lucky for us, Penny Arcade, a videograming-related web comic, posted the entire email chain.

To summarize, the customer service rep, a now infamous Paul Christoforo, President of Ocean Marketing, gets things started by replying simply, “Dec 17.” I have to wonder, if you’re not going to give someone the common courtesy of a full sentence, why bother? Upon following up again (after Dec. 17), the customer was told that Christmas delivery could no longer be guaranteed and he would need to “put on [his] big boy hat and wait it out like everyone else.”

At this point, the customer, a loyal gamer, cc’s a number of prominent bloggers in the videogaming world, including writers for Penny Arcade and Kotaku, on his response. Christoforo, believing he and his product are too big to fail, goes on to ‘reply all’ with what, I’m sure, will haunt him for the rest of his life. “Send that over to Engadget you look like a complete moron swearing and sending your customer service complaints to a magazine as if they will post it or even pay attention do you think you’re the first or the last what are they going to do demand us to tell you were your shipment is or ask for a refund on your behalf … Really … Welcome to the Internet ? Son Im 38 I wwebsite as on the internet when you were a sperm in your daddys balls and before it was the internet, thanks for the welcome to message wurd up.”

Eventually, Mike of Penny Arcade gets involved, and Christoforo is equally as rude in his correspondence with the blogger, leading Mike to post the entire email chain on Penny Arcade. The result? In less than 24 hours, Christoforo’s agency has lost the gaming account, people are coming out of the woodwork to deny any association with him and his company, and there are almost 100,000 search results for “Paul Christoforo.” Let me assure you that none of the search results are positive.

It’s an extreme case, but a great reminder that every customer is essential and deserves your attention. Not because they may know a popular blogger, but because their experience is important and each opportunity to connect is a touchpoint with your brand that you should be grateful for. It’s not hard to imagine an initial response from Christoforo that could have turned the customer into a brand evangelist.

FYI – Here’s the tweet that alerted me to this cautionary tale:

In case you missed it, you must read this tale of jaw-dropping douchebaggery from PR Paul at Ocean Marketing: http://t.co/Qr1JVRe1

December 27, 2011 1:58 pm via webReplyRetweetFavorite

@wilw

Wil Wheaton

Coming off the Fast Horse social media predictions for 2012, I asked several ponies to gaze into the murky crystal ball and predict what the future will hold for technology. While the responses were all over the board, the overwhelming theme is user experience. Whether it’s the experience of physically using technology or the ease/difficulty of navigating services offered – 2012 is sure to be all about you.

This may not surprise you. Each year new technology promises to simplify your life, integrate functions and improve utility — but it seems there is always something more to add into the mix. The predictions below seem to set up 2012 as the year that technology continues to evolve and benefit the user, but still falls short of meeting all of our expectations. (Especially, for Mike.)

Streaming Television Stirs the Pot
George Fiddler: From its new tiered subscription plans, to announcing Qwikster and abandoning it shortly thereafter, Netflix clearly made a few blunders in 2011. My prediction is that many subscribers who fled the video streaming service this year will flock back to it in 2012 as the company asserts itself as the leader in a major shift in original programming. Having invested millions to secure exclusive deals for David Fincher’s “House of Cards” and the return of “Arrested Development” – not to mention a possible new Dave Chappelle project – Netflix showed it’s serious about owning premium content. Hulu and YouTube (with Facebook soon to follow?) have signed exclusive deals of their own, for a documentary series and niche channels, respectively, all of which looks to shake up the world of traditional cable and force the networks to incorporate more of a social viewing experience in a hurry to keep up with the web players.

The Amazing Race – For Music
Alex Weaver: 2011 has been a big year for audiophiles with Spotify expanding service to the United States, the release of Google music and many other music services providing users with a catalogue of tunes at their fingertips. I predict that 2012 will be the year of competition for the pocket change of music subscribers. Each service will race to differentiate from the pack – already seen this year with Spotify opening its app platform to developers and music blog favorite, Daytrotter enabling a content paywall. I wouldn’t be surprised if Google music finds more legs in the upcoming year or Apple opens up a paid music-streaming service. Personally, I hope that a cross between Pandora, Spotify and iTunes becomes available – and if it is, please let me know – because the ability to discover, stream and purchase music within one platform would make my year.

Dear Abby, for Cell Phones
Amanda Mark: The battle between mobiles-can-do-everything and don’t-use-your-mobile-in-public will hit an all-time frenzy in 2012. Batteries and operating systems have improved so mobiles can used in almost every way as a laptop, apps have reorganized how we conduct our lives and 4G networks ensure we can consume all of the media we want, whenever we want. At the same time, most places of business ask you to not use your phone, the NTSB is trying to ban any phone use while driving and the etiquette police have agreed that NO ONE should use your phone when out with friends.  I think this will blow up like road rage a few years back: Horrific episodes in public where strangers will go ballistic on one another.

P.S. While I’m guilty of playing angry birds and fruit ninja while waiting in long lines in public, I’m completely on board with the NTSB.

Apple Expands to Television
Andrew Miller: So-called ‘smart TVs’ have been around now for a few years, but none of the major manufacturers have mastered the experience. That could change in 2012 if Apple rolls out its much-rumored television, as mentioned in Steve Jobs’ biography and on Apple fanboy blogs. No company has demonstrated a better understanding of the modern media consumer, so I expect the iTV – that’s what it has to go by, right? – will seamlessly integrate web browsing, social media, iTunes, FaceTime and more. Better yet – iTV will be accessible from mobile Apple devices. This should also be known as the moment the desktop computer died.

Bozo – The Juggling Technology Clown
Mike Keliher: Am just a cynical bastard if the best prediction I can come up with for the broad category of “technology in 2012” is a guess at what I believe won’t happen? I can say with quite a comfortable level of confidence that 2012 will not be the year in which avid online communicators are greeted with a solution to their platform-juggling pains. We all face at least another year of using:

• Google Talk, Facebook Messenger, Skype, AIM and maybe Live Messenger to chat with the two friends who use each one because no one has developed a good way to kick down the walls between them
• Facebook and Google+ and Twitter for sharing and interacting with friends online because they all have their strengths and their weaknesses and they’re battling to the death to keep you from bailing completely for one of the others (actually Google+ seems to not be battling for much of anything, content to just wait until Facebook blows itself up)
• Flickr and Picasa and SmugMug for sharing photos because other people actually use Flickr, but Picasa is integrated with all of the other Google tools you use, but SmugMug actually offers the features photographers care about
• YouTube and Vimeo and Facebook for sharing videos because if it’s not on YouTube it didn’t happen, but Vimeo is actually enjoyable and doesn’t induce seizures, but Facebook is where people you’ve actually met might actually see your stuff
• Anything made by Zynga and LinkedIn for mindlessly wasting time because Zynga has mastered the development of mindless time-wasting games and you can’t help but feel that someday, maybe when you need a job, LinkedIn will actually be useful

Which media logos do the best job reassuring potential customers that a business is legit? One online service recently ran interesting experiment to find out. (Hat tip to MediaWire for the heads up on this study.)

Thumbtack.com, which hooks up service providers with people in need of service, concluded that logos from the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal boosted conversions among the general public. The familiar blue-and-white USA Today nameplate actually hurt business.

Thumbtack did A/B testing on separate landing pages aimed at consumers and service providers (house cleaners, handymen, pet sitters, etc.). The Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal boosted conversions for both sets of users. The New York Times did great among consumers, but didn’t do well among the service providers.

USA performed poorly among both groups, actually driving down conversions. In other words, Thumbtack’s call-to-action pages hooked more users without the USA Today logo than with it.

In its post explaining the results, Thumbtack said, “We have no idea why this hugely popular newspaper would have decreased conversions across the board. Your guess is as good as ours.”

So here’s my guess: Even after all these years, USA Today comes across as a lightweight media brand. The paper marks its 30th anniversary next year, but it’s still seen as something of a freebie. You know, the newspaper you see laying around the boarding area at the airport or the paper you find waiting for you outside your hotel room door.

Some of the knock against USA Today is unwarranted. The paper’s reporters have done great work over the years. One notable example was USA Today’s work in 2006 exposing the National Security Agency’s efforts to compile a gigantic database of Americans’ private phone calls. USA Today’s entertainment and sports pages have been good over the years, too.

USA Today ushered in a new era of graphic design among newspapers — punchy layouts, quick reads and lots of color graphics. In some ways, USA Today’s bold look and bite-size morsels of information were a precursor to what we’ve become used to on the web.

In recent years, of course, USA Today has been beset by many of the same problems plaguing newspapers across the nation. Revenue losses have forced staff reductions, which in turn have hurt the quality of the product.

Way back when, I was part of endeavor mocking USA Today. In December 1991, the staff of the Minnesota Daily put out a USA Today spoof called the U of M ToDaily. We packed almost story with bullets and tweaked the familiar “Snapshots” feature with a tagline of “A look at stats that don’t really matter.” Not long after the issue came out, we got a letter from USA Today lawyers telling us to knock off the knock offs.

Maybe we were on to something even back then. USA Today is the paper millions of people read, but few truly love.

Turns out we’re not alone.

A recent study by Yahoo found television alone just isn’t enough for most audiences, as 75 percent of Internet surfers are browsing while watching television. Break it down by device and tablet users are the biggest multitaskers:

Yahoo featured the study on its advertising blog, but the findings confirm what sharper PR and marketing professionals have come to realize. These days, consumers have a voracious, irresistible hunger for media, and it’s completely telling that a favorite television show or big game can no longer completely engross viewers.

Take me, for example. During a single televised Minnesota Vikings game, I keep close watch of my fantasy football team on ESPN.com, I post about the game on Twitter and Facebook, I read player bios on Wikipedia, I read rapid reaction from bloggers, I review statistics on Football Outsiders and I monitor other games on NFL.com. It’s not that I’m distracted. I’m just interested in the broader context of the game and I don’t allow television to limit my experience.

Think about what the multitasking television viewer means for public relations. In the past, landing a client on the six o’clock news gave marketers a chance to positively shape a story and influence consumers. Altogether, a nice win. Now, television is just a jumping off point. You get your client a glowing three-minute segment, that’s just the start. The same consumer you’re trying to reach might visit your client’s website, blog, Facebook page and Twitter account before the segment ends.

The lesson for PR pros? There’s no sense in separating traditional and digital media strategies while consumers are devouring both forms simultaneously. Tell your client’s story on television and viewers will come to the Internet with questions of their own. Viewers aren’t distracted by their devices. The reality is they’ve never been more engaged.

I thought about a set of these bad boys.

I just outfitted both my cars with brand-new, all-season radials — four on each car. It wasn’t cheap, but it’s one of those necessary expenses that you just have to bite the bullet on.

I really debated whether I should get snow tires. There were a few times during last winter’s snowmageddon when I thought that might be a good idea. In the end, I decided against it — because of the added expense of eight extra tires, as well as the hassle of finding a place in my garage to store them.

There was also this: I’ve lived in the far north most of my life — including Minnesota, Alaska and upstate New York. And I’ve never owned a four-wheel-drive vehicle. I’ve always been convinced that a front-wheel-drive car with all-season radials will get you through 95 percent of the situations you’ll encounter. I can’t ever recall not being able to get where I wanted to go.

But that’s not what the experts say. For the best winter performance, they recommend snow tires. Snow tires have more aggressive tread patterns plus extra grooves (called “siping”) for added traction. They’re also made of a softer rubber compound that remains more pliable — hence grippier — in the cold. According to several experts I consulted on the Interwebs, even inexpensive snow tires will give better performance in the winter than all-season radials.

That’s fine, but how many households want to maintain summer and winter tire wardrobes for their cars? That’s eight tires to deal with if you own just one car, 16 tires if you have two cars and 24 tires if your household has three vehicles. That’s a lot of rubber to juggle.

I’m sticking with my all-season Firestones, and I bet I don’t get stuck this winter. At least I don’t live in Quebec, where they passed a law in 2008 requiring all vehicles to wear four winter tires from Dec. 15 to March 15.

Wendy Sorquist with a tray of handmade Pashen bars. Some will get a cacao coating.

Minneapolis seems to be foodie heaven these days, with acclaimed restaurants opening in every neighborhood, a thriving ethnic dining scene and exciting food items popping up in even the most mainstream grocers.

But I’ve got my eye on West Broadway, a gritty street in North Minneapolis that shows promise of becoming a new center of local food culture, thanks to Kindred Kitchen.

Kindred Kitchen opened a year ago with the goal of incubating food businesses. A creation of Catalyst Community Partners with major funding from the Pohlad Family Foundation, General Mills and others, Kindred Kitchen offers a commercial kitchen space that food entrepreneurs can rent by the hour.

The organization also offers classes that lead budding businesspeople through the steps necessary for a successful venture: licensing, insurance, food safety, product development, marketing. In its first year, several dozen food entrepreneurs have used Kindred Kitchen as a launching pad, including Natedogs, Vellee Deli and Sweet Jules caramels.

Wendy Sorquist, a North Minneapolis resident, was driving home late one night earlier this year. Through the window of Kindred Kitchen, she saw a woman baking pies. It was the push Sorquist needed.

She and her brother, Pol, had talked about doing something with a recipe developed by their sister, a nutritionist and wellness counselor on the East Coast. With the sister’s blessing, Wendy and Pol jumped in. Within a month, they were licensed, insured and making a raw, organic, sprouted energy bar they dubbed Pashen Bars.

Kindred Kitchen offered not only direct support, but also connections to the wider world of food vendors and food buyers. They landed some customers in short order — Pashen Bars are now available in more than a half-dozen locations, including Surdyk’s, the Seward Co-op and the Golden Fig.

Wendy Sorquist said their goal is to get the bars in all 44 of Minnesota’s food co-ops, noting that Minnesota has more co-ops per capita than any other state. Their most effective marketing activity to date has been old-fashioned sampling; she goes to every Pashen location twice a month and spends two to three hours offering samples and talking with customers.

Pashen is a high-end product, with a suggested retail price of $4.99 for a 2-ounce bar. But sales have progressed steadily, she said, edging into five figures after only six months on the market. The Sorquists make all the bars by hand at Kindred Kitchen, turning out 300 to 1,000 at a time and paying around $25 an hour in kitchen rental.

“We could never have afforded a commercial kitchen,” Sorquist said. “This has been just fantastic. We’re already talking about adding trail mix and granola.”

This is John Reinan’s weekly marketing column for MinnPost.com.