Comment on Dim Bulb: The Ethics of Ethics

Here's link to my good friend's branding and marketing blog, Dim Bulb. He discusses whether socially responsible corporations actually have an advantage in the marketplace.

Dim Bulb: The Ethics of Ethics

As Jonathan points out, and several people commenting confirm, consumers often don't "do as they say". Ethical consumerism sounds good but people aren't always willing to make the personal sacrifice.

I was a vegetarian for many years. Inevitably the topic came up during meals and most carnivores at the table felt compelled to explain why they were eating less meat. Usually, the reason involved their health. They assumed I didn't eat meat because I wanted to be more healthy. I try to be a healthy eater, but that wasn't the reason I was a vegetarian. I was a vegetarian because I was opposed to factory farming and the inhumane treatment of animals. When I mentioned factory farming as the reason, generally the friendly conversation about meat-eating ended rather abruptly.

The conclusion I draw from this (based purely on my personal anecdotal evidence) is that the majority of people change their behavior if there is a direct benefit to them. For most people, "doing the right thing" in a consumer situation doesn't result in enough of a direct benefit to make them change their behavior. Helping an old lady across the street provides direct feedback to the do-gooder. However, helping an old lady earn a living wage in Bolivia by purchasing fairly traded goods isn't quite the same.

What's my point? The best advertisers don't just rely on consumer's conscience to spur them to action. They give consumers a direct, personal benefit plus an ethical benefit. Clorox delayed the introduction of their Greenworks line by 6 months to make sure that it worked as well as other chemical-based cleaners. Many other eco-friendly lines of cleaners had failed to win over mainstream consumers because they just didn't work as well. The Greenwork's website contains an amalgamation of direct consumer and environmental benefits. While it might not win over the people who are already using environmentally friendly products, it goes a long way in giving the average consumer a reason to pay slightly more for a "green" product.

Elections and Nationalism

I ran across this poem and it spoke to me during this election year.

My Country Awake
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by Thee into ever-widening thought and action;
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

- Rabindranath Tagore

Asia's first Nobel laureate and named one of Time Magazine's most influencial Asian's of the 20th centurty, Rabindranath Tagore, was the greatest writer in modern Indian literature, a Bengali poet, novelist, educator, and an early advocate of independence for India. Tagore's influence over Gandhi and the founders of modern India was enormous, but his reputation as a writer and mystic has caused many to ignore his role as a political activist. In fact, one of his songs became the national anthem of India and another the national anthem of Bangladesh.

Tagore's travels lead him to write of the folly of borders and patriotism. He stressed the need for new world order based on cross-cultural values and ideas, the "unity consciousness." His ideal was the Universal Man. Tagore warned of the dangers of nationalistic thought. "Patriotism cannot be our final spiritual shelter; my refuge is humanity," he wrote.

In this U.S. election year, let us dream of a country where we are without fear and united, not with ourselves, but with the rest of world. Let us strive for unity and hope for Peace.

Let our minds be free to the possibilities of what should be and not what might happen. And with open hearts and minds, let our country awake to a new day.

Superbowl No Chicken Dance for the Patriots

It's nice to have a Superbowl where the game is SO much better than the ads. How many times have you spent the Monday after the game discussing the ads and not the game with your colleagues at work? Not this year. What a game!

I'm not a big football fan, nor did I have a preference for either New England or Giants going into the game. But, I couldn't help cheering for the underdog Giants as they came from behind in the 4th quarter. Now that's good football.

On to the Chicken Dance. As you may have read, KFC challenged any scoring player or Tom Petty to do the Chicken Dance during the game. If they completed a 3 second dance, KFC would donate $260,000 to charity. NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy called it a case of "ambush marketing 101" and warned that any players participating could face stiff fines.

Chicken Dance winners and losers?

NFL is a big loser for even commenting on KFC's "ambush marketing". Why dignify the challenge with a response? Comment board traffic was overwhelmingly negative towards the NFL with one poster renaming it the "No Fun League".

KFC was a slight winner. They managed to jump on the Superbowl marketing machine without spending more than the cost of a press release distribution. They'd be a big winner if they had figured out a way not to seem so crass and opportunistic.

The players and Tom Petty were winners. Of course, neither the players nor Tom Petty Chicken Danced during the game. With the quality of the performances all around, they focused on winning the game rather than KFC or any of the other Superbowl hype. True professionals.

What a game! (Did I say that already?)

The Blurring Lines of Entertainment

Despite the cold weather, My husband, son and I were nice and toasty last Saturday at the Girl Talk/Dan Deacon show at Metro. Markus and I stayed in the balcony while my son, Mars (aka Button), joined in the fray below.

Both Girl Talk and Dan Deacon blur the line between performer and audience. Dan Deacon performs in the middle of the crowd instead of on the stage. He becomes, not a showman for the audience, but the leader of a massive party experience. Everyone participates. Everyone is an entertainer.

Girl Talk (Gregg Gillis) performs on the stage, but invites people up on stage with him. Like Deacon, the crowd becomes the entertainment. Of course, Gillis became part of the crowd several times by crowd surfing or jumping in and dancing.

I'm not sure if the decision to break down audience barriers is because the performers are both solo acts and it's difficult to pull off a full set by yourself or because of the personalities of Deacon and Gillis. Both seemed to be humble and accessible - a sort of anti-rock star.

Both Deacon and Gillis are products of the current digital age of user generated content (can we think of a new name, please? DIYc?). With the collapse of the industrial music complex and the speed of exposure on the internet, it's no longer anointed stars that make it on to the stage. It's people like Deacon and Gillis who understand that creating an environment of social participation and interaction is the future of entertainment.

In the future, everyone is famous.

Tech Cocktail 7

My law firm, Fitzgerald & Hewes, LLP, is one of the sponsors of Tech Cocktail 7. Stop by our table and say hello if you're there.

Details:

Date
Thursday, February 21, 2008

Time
6:30 pm CT - 9:00 pm CT

Location
John Barleycorn Wrigleyville
3524 N Clark St
Upstairs
Chicago, IL 60657

Be sure to register right away. The event is often fully booked.

Ignite Chicago

Last night, my law firm, Fitzgerald & Hewes, co-sponsored the first Ignite event in Chicago. Ignite events are happening across the country. Thanks to the efforts of Sean Harper and Jesper Andersen the Chicago entrepreneurial community showed up to the party in their party dress.

If you're not familiar with the Ignite events, here's brief description:

If you had five minutes on stage what would you say? What if you only got 20 slides and they rotated automatically after 15 seconds? Around the world geeks have been putting together Ignite nights to show their answers.

Last night's event was a cross between a tech event (with free drinks thanks to us sponsors) and a poetry slam. Very cool. You could feel the brainwaves and creativity in the air. My husband, Markus Giolas, founder and president of Real Talent, hopped right on the shadow sculpting contest. We'll see if he won.

Ignite Chicago - don't miss the next one.

The Apple of RIAA's Eye

You know you have a lawyer in the family when dinner table discussion often involves digital rights and illegal downloading. Actually, I can't only blame the lawyer (me) in this instance. My husband is a photographer and his profession involves licensing intellectual property rights in his photographs. My son is interested in pursuing a career in a creative field. We have many friends who are artists, writers,musicians and in the film industry. Also, the three of us (me, hubby and teenage son) are avid music fans.

I also worked at a startup that was in the internet radio/streaming music business. We had a direct interest in the RIAA's policies on digital rights and licensing. In 1999 and 2000, my business development team worked out licensing arrangements with several major and independent labels at prices that didn't make a whole lot of sense at the time. Hey, it was 1999 and startups were paying crazy prices for everything just to be the first one to make a deal. The labels liked our model because we didn't offer downloads and we were willing to pay them to play their artists on our internet radio stations. In the traditional radio world, it was often the other way around.

I noted with interest the recent exchange between Apple, EMI and the RIAA regarding digital rights management (DRM). EMI is contemplating a model where music is distributed without DRM and would, therefore, allow the digital music files to be freely transferred. EMI's first offer to online music retailers was an upfront, multi-million dollar "risk-insurance" payment that would not apply against future sales. This proposal didn't fly with the retailers. According to the Wall Street Journal, EMI has requested that the online retailers submit a proposal that indicates the size of advance they would be willing to pay. EMI received the proposals on February 8th. So far, no announcements have been made, but Yahoo Music's General Manager, Dave Goldberg, predicts that by Christmas most of Yahoo's catalog will be DRM free.

Apple's Steve Jobs jumped into the fray on February 6th (two days before the EMI proposal was due) with an essay on DRM entitled "Thoughts on Music". He states that CD's do not have DRM software, so the music industry currently sells 97% of music without DRM. What's all of this fuss about a measly 3% of the market? Isn't it an artifice to require Apple to use DRM when 97% of music sales are not protected? Can't we just all get along in an DRM-free world?

Nice try, Steve. Everyone knows (or assumes) that Apple is seeking complete and utter control over the remaining 97% of the market. And, while digital music sales are increasing, they aren't making up for lost CD sales, which fell by 23% between 2000 and 2006. Total music sales for 2006 fell by 3%.

The RIAA quickly reiterated its position on the necessity of DRM, and shot an arrow at Steve Jobs and Apple. The RIAA suggested that if the constraints of DRM are slowing the growth of digital downloads because files can't be transferred freely between devices, then Apple should remove the portion of their DRM that restricts songs purchased from Apple to playback on the iPod only. Wouldn't that solve the problem? Touché, Apple.

I'm not a big fan of the RIAA and their "sue first, and think outside the box later" strategy. I'm also not a big fan of the argument that record labels deserve it because they are big companies and they've been ripping off artists for years. If they deserve it, then why doesn't everyone loot their local Walmart? It's an extreme example, but one that highlights the fact that Intellectual Property is, just that, property. The number of files that have been traded online is equivalent to looting.

Back to the dinner table discussion. I think my son understands the consequences of illegal downloading. Not the punitive consequences that "you could get sued or go to jail", but the fact that people he knows, like his father and our friends, make a living from Intellectual Property by licensing the right to reproduce their creations. Copying other peoples work and not paying for it may be convenient, but it is still stealing.

A legal, convenient and inexpensive approach is needed. The RIAA's DRM solution is inconvenient. Apple's $0.99/track approach is too expensive. Actually, the solution that makes the most sense to me is the Electronic Frontier Foundation's proposal on a collective licensing arrangement. The artists and labels get paid and consumers get the convenience of file sharing at a reasonable cost.

Unfortunately, don't expect the RIAA or Apple to agree to this approach any time soon. They have too much invested in the current system. There are other alternatives, such as emusic, that are making headway with DRM-free downloads from independent music labels. Personally, I subscribe to two streaming music services, Yahoo Music Unlimited and Rhapsody from Real Networks. Because I don't have a long commute to work, I listen to music at home. With these services and my Kima KS-110 (shameless plug), I'm happy as can be. I have access to millions of songs, without advertising, and I don't have to worry about DRM or my hard drive crashing and losing 1000's of downloaded music files. I listen to more new music now than ever. However, most Americans listen to music primarily in their car where streaming music is just starting to be available. So, for now, a solution to the DRM-wars is still needed and don't expect it from the RIAA or Apple any time soon.