of all emails, i have been with yahoo the longest.
i still have (i believe) my original 8th grade yahoo account.
if it's not the first, it's the second. at absolute worst.
back when email and AIM were the only social modes of communication.
and i haven't left it yet, if only because i enjoy those random Facebook-esque moments when people look into their address books and rediscover that email. it's easier than updating everyone to my gmail, and besides, i use my yahoo and gmail accounts differently. partly because of the huge influx of spam i get to my yahoo account. i mean on a given day i get upwards of 50 spam messages. that's with spam blocker enabled, and with my specifying "which messages are spam."
i understand the email's been "out there" for years.
i understand you're "doing what you can" to help with spam.
hell, i even get that with all your money, maybe you can't make your spam filters better. i even accept that some people want what i'd consider spam and so filters may not be the best answer.
but the heart of why they're on my shitlist is you can only block a grand total of 500 emails of spam. i'm getting really, really close to that number. to boot, it's really difficult to weed through blocked emails in case i want to unblock someone. if i have 400+ emails blocked and i accidentally blocked an Amazon email, i literally can't find the time to locate and unblock that email address. there is no search function. just one long scrolling list.
regardless. my real question is.
WHY ARE YOU LIMITING THE NUMBER OF EMAIL SENDERS I VIEW AS SPAM TO MY INBOX?
...isn't that MY choice? and after 7+ years, don't you think my numbers might be a bit high? way to penalize your long time users. and make us run screaming from our inbox in a tragically let-down manner. toward your competitors. hell. at least gmail's spamblocker does its job. (we'll see how long that lasts. only had that one for 2-3 years.)
[the brand montage a la dear jane][see larger logos]
rather than do a TYPICAL day in the life of Riot brands, i decided to do an EXACT day in the life. and analyze what all that means to me. i realized in the doing that it wasn't exactly what i thought it would be, nor was it exactly representative. this is MAY 23 08. thoughts below. anything marked with an asterisk didn't have a Google-able logo.
THE BREAKDOWN: AM WAKEUP
08:15: verizon • LG
08:18: DELL • Adobe Photoshop • IE
08:30: Crest • Oral-B • Dove • Gilette • Axe • Tom Ford
08:33: lolo* • rave* • Saucony • TWLOHA • Style&Co
08:40: FOX • Sephora • Neutrogena • CoverGirl • Benefit • Urban Decay • MAC
08:50: Nike • Nissan Maxima • Fueled by Ramen
THE ARRIVAL: AM WORK
09:00: Apple • N.Design Studio • Intellimerge • Firefox • Entourage • iChat
09:04: Cafe Du Monde • Stop&Shop Tea • Domino Sugar
09:11: Apple • Firefox • Google • WordPress • Blogger • Twitter
10:05: Firefox • Twitter • Amazon • TextEdit • Verizon • LG
11:35: iTunes • TextEdit • Firefox • Twitter
LUNCH TIME+: AFTERNOON DAZE
01:28: Verizon • LG • Altamira* • Dickies • MasterCard • HSBC
01:50: Gino's* • Gatorade • Chase • HSBC • Twitter
02:11: TextEdit • Quark • iChat
FREEDOM: POST-WORK WIND DOWN
05:00: Verizon • LG • Nissan Maxima
05:14: DELL • IE • MSN • Chatroom*
06:45: Tina's II*
08:32: Verizon • LG
08:45: DELL • IE • MSN • Chatroom*
10:06: Verizon • LG
10:12: DELL • IE • MSN
GET THE FLOCK OUT OF HERE
11:16: Hyundai • Tom Ford • Nike • Lily Flanagan's • Blue Moon
11:43: Hyundai • Delicious • Subculture • Sambuca • More Sambuca
12:20: Black Haus • Peach Schnapps* • Southern Comfort • Rose's Lime
03:10: DELL • IE
03:20: Ford Taurus • Taco Bell • Ford Taurus • Crest • Oral-B
BEDTIME! Somewhere around 4AMish.
now, here are the interesting things when i consider a literal day in brands. as in what i actually used and did not use. this gets a little personal, but i promise there are deductions.
1 -- THE UN-BRANDS and their sneaky, sneaky ways: that particular day, i had a very, very casual friday. i was supposed to head onto the LIRR directly from work to see my very ill best friend in New Hyde Park, so i was in jeans, a tank, and kicks. not necessarily my daily work attire. not to mention, i couldn't have told you what bra brand and undies i was wearing that day--or socks. even though i'm usually a Vikki's Secret girl, and wear Journeys socks, i know i wasn't doing that. not to mention, i have no idea what brand of toilet paper my agency uses, nor have i any idea their faucet's brand, etc. as much as we are branded, there are still small simple places. i don't look down and see "Cottonell" imprinted on my toilet paper.
2 -- DEVIATIONS & SACRIFICE, or, Change of Plans: the best laid plans of mice and men. what happens when your brands aren't there for you? so i had to do laundry. so i didn't have Vikki's undies or Journeys socks. i had some nameless undergarments and borrowed my mom's socks. my agency was out of Tazo Earl Grey and PNGTips tea (the HORROR) so i had to drink Stop&Shop (sacrilege). i couldn't make it to my HSBC bank, so i had to use Chase, which is a bastard for charging $3 to take out my own cash and $1.50 to transfer funds. i don't like DELL or IE, but that's my laptop right now while i'm saving for a Mac(Black)book. i wear my Reverie Duel hoodie every day--except that one, because i couldn't find it. so my choices were reflective of my day, not my normal brand usage, and the psychology of pressure.
3 -- THE LIES ABOUT daily brand use: just because i use you daily, doesn't mean i'm loyal to you, or ever really like you. ie: DELL, case in point. Dove, too, whom i hate but it was there in the house. also, i only own 1 Dickies item (my wallet) and while i see the logo every day, it does nothing for me. likewise with Nike (my bag is my only Nike purchase) and FOX (my makeup bag--that's all). some things are like breathing, and i don't have to think about them--like my N.Design desktop at work. i use it, but i don't change it or interact with it, though i like the art. unlike, say, my ugly DELL's desktop, which i made using Audrey Kitching photos. yes, Lily Flanagan's is a usual haunt for me--but usually only on thursdays; had i gone to New Hyde Park, i never would have been there. to boot, all 3 cars mean nothing to me--they belong to (in order) my mom, my other best friend, and my partner.
4 -- ON TO PROM QUEENS & star quarterbacks: then, on to what really matters. what brands am i loyal to that i do actually use every day? what appears here that is typical of me, that i do think of as my personal "prom queen" brands? my alcohols, of course. i'm very picky with that. so Blue Moon, Sambuca, swedish fish shots, and Soco Lime are all pretty representative. add in Magic Hat #9, Goldschlager, Patron, Jose Cuervo, Ketel, and Reyka, and that's the short list of things i'll drink without spitting on you. my get-ready gear--Axe deodorant, Tom Ford Black Orchid perfume, my makeup, my daily tea. my style: never leave without at least a To Write Love On Her Arms button; Delicious shoes are club footwear of choice (Pleaser, too). my work habits--i need Apple, Adobe, iTunes, iChat, Twitter, Blogger, Firefox, Amazon, TextEdit. the real prom queens aren't necessarily hip; just what i can't live without.
the value isn't in the daily use, but instead in what i'd miss sacrificing. i wouldn't miss my Oral-b toothbrush, and i wouldn't cry if i had to switch from Crest. if i had to trade my Post-Its for Staples brand, that's okay by me. but don't you take my personal prom queens. don't you take Tazo Earl Grey from me; you'll be getting a fight. and don't you DARE take away my cell phone. its batteries died early yesterday. i was without it for 20 minutes. i cried a little--inside.
...eat my life.
will catch up with you crazy folks tomorrow.
i had a good weekend, how about you?
if any of these mean anything to you, let me know:
subculture (go see my fave bartender--she's on the left, i didn't take the pic), avenue of the americas street fair, joe (cup o', nuff said), uncle jack's steakhouse (i dare you to find a better filet mignon), fire island, ice palace, robert moses beach, bayard cutting arboretum. oh, and then my couch, with Home Alone II.
tomorrow i return with the full writeup and thoughts around my brand timeline.
i have so many thoughts about this already and i've only been doing it for about and hour and a half. i've taken on dear jane's brand timeline challenge. and what an excellent day to do it. it's a dress down friday and i have a long, long day ahead of me. by this time, 9:44AM, i already have 40 brands (exactly) written down. i'm trying to be really meticulous and notice every brand i use. results will be posted tuesday. i may update this post today with any worthy thoughts surrounding my conscious brand experience.
i can't say it better than Marshall Kirkpatrick, who reports on Facebook's message censorship. good comments going on there, too. censorship makes Riots very, very cranky. you don't want a cranky Riot, let alone multiple cranky Riots. you really don't need to know me in my plural state. anyway. i only recently started getting heavy into Facebook again after a year or two of App Intimidation, but the Flair app has assuaged me. this might send me running yet again.
in other news, Zappos is still bloody brilliant and is paying their employees $1000 to quit after one week. you're jealous you didn't think of it first. it's okay: you can still do it. something about imitation and flattery, right? i'm still trying to figure out why, if i'm so in love with how zappos runs things, i've still not been able to find a pair of shoes on that site worthy of ordering... i do want to support. i'm trying?
and lastly, it seems i've also become a connoisseur of the lolcat, and so, compliments of @ckieff, i give you Cats For Obama dot com.
in fact, don't comment.
if you're passionate and opinionated, give up.
after all, blogging doesn't matter, anyway.
certainly don't attempt to have a conversation.
adage, screw you. take that for personal and offensive.
i went out of my way to REGISTER just to bloody comment on this post, which i addressed in my blog here. i am one for conversing, as many of you know. why not close the gap, get feedback from the person who wrote it? but since i can't use a url on AdAge, i just gave my abbreviated thoughts.
which have been deleted and censored.
"Ad Age reserves the right to delete comments that are insulting or personal in nature."
i did not insult the writer in any fashion. nor was anything i said personal. i was addressing the fact that, perhaps, this was not the best method, and that, perhaps, when i go to a store i like to see a person. a la the post i wrote.
what the fuck, AdAge? communicate this.
so, after having the luck to engage in an interesting conversation with Ian Schafer, a very smart man, yesterday via Twitter, i decided to delve deeper into the advertising thoughts i initially considered in "huge tracks of land."
i asked what he thought of socialvibe and its implications, after reading something written in Adweek (wish i knew what it was, the link is gone now). he felt skeptical because it gives incentives for a given behavior, but felt that the fact socialvibe benefited charities may even it out. i replied that i liked it because it enabled users to choose what their profiles support, giving street cred to the ads.
he argued this would be problematic if all users were allowed to select their own advertising, because some advertisers wouldn't be selected, and users would inevitably support 'prom king' brands. which, naturally, has a lot of merit. because it's true.
but, nevertheless, the concept i'm talking about would only apply to a user's specific profile--not the apps page, or the main page, or 'common areas' owned by more than one person (ie, events or groups). in that way, less popular folks could still get the word out on the same platform, while making advertising more relevant on personal spaces. agreeing in theory, examples he offered were like nascar or skate decks.
i then asked him if he thought incentive was a bad thing to offer users, since it is the users who bring value (data) to the networks. after all, if the users weren't valuable, advertisers wouldn't be up in arms trying to sort out how to reach them effectively, and there wouldn't be such a bid on Facebook's ownership. and guess what? kids are starting to realize this. i wish i had the Facebook link, but kids were responding saying they wanted money for their data being used. i was floored.
in comparison to giving up cash flow, what's wrong with perk compensation for choice advertisements? ian replied saying that, "playing devil's advocate, isn't using a service for free compensation enough for seeing ads?" initially, i say, yes, by far it's compensation enough, even on a place like Twitter, where i'm not giving out a lot of data value. but on Facebook or Myspace? it seems the perfect way to solve the ad-relevance problem.
+ let users choose the ads their profile page sponsors.
[on social media sites in which the users offer up a lot of personal information, like Facebook and Myspace]
- give them the option of using socialvibe in its place.
[so that if they should want, they can donate to charity through their ads. not all users will opt for this, though, since i doubt socialvibe could host the multitude of sponsors kids will want, and i doubt those multitude of sponsors all want to donate to charity.]
+ use the socialvibe method for incentives
[each day the ad is up, you get 1 Entry. on a given day, there are drawings for incentives that support the user's chosen sponsor. IE, a $20 gift certificate to PacSun for those whose ads are for PacSun. this promotes brand value at the same time as not too much monetary loss. this also fosters elitism and competition, which also adds brand value.]
+ in this way, social space advertising becomes relevant
[if the ad reflects my friend's interests, i'm going to be equally as interested in his or her brand choices as their music choices. we show our sponsors on our tee shirts, from brands to clothing companies to coca cola; showing our preferences on our profiles will only add to this level of sharing. in fact, limiting the amount of sponsors a profile can have will become necessary, likely only 1-3. this increases response rate to advertisements. it also makes users feel like a worthwhile part of the cycle, rather than having ads be something purely ignored.]
these are my current advertising thoughts with regards to social media networks.
i'm already a walking advertisement. i'm supporting my socialvibe charity as i type this in my TWLOHA shirt while wearing matching MAC eyemakeup. why not capitalize on these tendencies and harness them to make advertising more useful without being more intrusive?
i am not the first to discuss this, nor one of the best, either. but despite downtime, it's becoming quite apparent to me that the gods of twitter are displeased and are turning a deaf ear. and no, i don't just mean about the downtime.
am&a (@reverieapparel) and i were discussing ups and downs of twitter, functionally speaking. among the fact that easy to implement things would make twitter more useful (having a 'new messages' count for DMs apart from the lump sum, ie "1 // 12"; being able to select multiple DMs to delete rather than one at a time; the ability to search for a follower's name in the DM dropdown; all of these and more would be great)--we discovered there's no real way to get in touch with twitter.
continually people want to share (duh) and give feedback (hullo for free!) to make the service a better one for its users. and yet, there's no "feedback" button that gets you in touch with the company--at least not one that i've found or has been referred to me. apart from a lagging twitter account for updates and a blog in which they don't comment back, there's not much to close the loop.
the big question, o twitter which connects us, is: why?
why aren't you listening and getting involved? why aren't you utilizing your own work in the ways that other companies are? use twitter to get in touch with those on twitter. we're there. (a lot.)
badass: Recount - showing us how badly we effed up since '00. it dares you to recast your presidential vote. if you can. (cue badass music)
more badass: Stoli Hotel - helping you forget to remember anything at all. it's a traveling circus, only with beds. the only way it could be better is if it weren't stoli. but hey, i already admitted i'm a vodka snob.
badasser: Beating Card - bringing you fight club in the safety of your interwebs. check out toad all decked out in black and blues. sexy, i tell you. heh.
and a parting gift, for those of us who have a slightly different definition of badass:
intellectual badassness: Inner Daemon - in His Dark Materials spirit, you can figure out what your inner daemon is. i've got a snow leopard. @dailybiz has some nice toucan plumage.
how to engage us once i've convinced you that your company really, really needs 20something thinkers. and in case you didn't know, we're gonna change the world, or at least the interwebs... yeah. that we are. at least it's a far cry better than that hideous nytimes article citing us as lazy bastards. again, i reiterate: i do not have to hate my job. i'm sorry you do.
can i get another "duh" and "i was right" in this corner? kthanx.
adrants picked up a piece on SocialVibe which--guess what? makes social networking ads more relevant by appealing to peoples' ACTUAL interests.
effin' novel, i tell you. bloody hell. finally. "huge tracks of land" aside, awesome way to advertise, and even better that it's linked to charities. that gets a huge KUDOS from Riot. in fact, i'm going to go implement it. so there.
next step? have user-chosen ads REPLACE non-chosen ad placement on user-interfaced social media sites like Facebook, Myspace.
If you like, you may live in a computer created world all day and all night. You will be able to try out a Virtual life with a Virtual lover. You can go into your Virtual house and do Virtual housework, add a baby or two, even find out if you’d rather be gay. Or single. Or straight. Why hesitate when you could simulate.
And sex? Certainly. Teledildonics is the word.
(Jeanette Winterson, Written on the Body, p. 97)
NO. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO. AND... NO?
"In other words, if everything else in a consumer's life is connected through digital, shopping should be, too."
if i want to be alone and not interact with people when i shop, I SHOP ONLINE.
i don't need to get on a car, in a subway, on a train, to go visit a store without people. granted, it's "less employees," not "no employees," but what's the difference? those people who still are employed will find better ways to "use the time" they're being paid for than to perform customer service, which requires patience, effort, and understanding. why do that when a computer can do it for you? besides, it's not like we need more jobs available anyway...
can i keep saying NO any more?
how many times do you call a phone of a company now and get into an endless automated loop about some stupid thing you never wanted to tell them just because you can't get a HUMAN on the phone? a human who could have answered your question in 2.5 seconds? i don't want to stare at a screen to discern my purchasing protocol. if i'm not doing it online i a) want a personal opinion about the product or b) i procrastinated and need said item NOW, at which point i'm not asking any questions anyway: my mind is made up. removing employed people from stores is a surefire way to lose traffic to said store. they could just buy online.
we are already disconnected. we are seeking connections via pixels. welcome to the age of mass communication. mass disillusionment. mass isolation. and you're just making it worse rather than fostering those connections. if anything, this technology should be a tool used by employees to help customers. like the computers in Borders or Wawa or your local tech-savvy deli. but for the love of interaction and humanity, don't lose the people. sometimes i leave the house just to see another face.
beware the stone gods.
from here, found here.
i like it a lot. my one thought, however:
the 20th century = mass production for mass consumption
factories, cars, televisions, and fridges
the 21st century = mass innovation
i still think it's missing the point a little. innovation is the sideproduct.
the "cashification" and "monetization" capable aspect, if you will.
the 21st century = mass creation for mass communication
people want to communicate and connect, and so share. not innovate; that's secondary.
i've been ruminating on this post for part of the day now.
apart from that a girl's line of Beyonce's Dereon is so forgettable it never made it to my list of top things i never wanted to see created, i wanted to consider exactly why i found it repulsive. other than the fact that, you know, good feminists say stuff like that. [though the definition of 'good feminist' changes daily, so i really don't try to keep up.]
i'm cranky because there are about thirty different ways this ad could have looked. using the same ridiculous clothing. the girls are too young to know what they want to wear. they shop where Beyonce-loving fashionista mommy shops. you ask that mom if they want to overtly want their daughters to look trashy-hip, chances are they'll disagree--or don't see it as trashy-hip.
this should have embodied more about what the brand embodies to those people who buy it. style, sure, no doubt. but c'mon, it's Beyonce. how about a freezeframe of the girls in the clothing; one singing, one playing drums on the couch, one with air guitar? girls doing something and being stylish. i see that poorly executed there, with the piano and the faux-posed guitar groupie shot. it looks like someone had a good idea and it got trampled.
what about hearkening back to the princess, as was suggested in the post? that is, the one girls wanted to be when they were little. give them dolls. let them play. lord knows the Bratz dolls would fit right in stylistically. or better yet, before i get on a rant on dolls/Bratz, what about a campaign in which girls model their moms? show a shot of mom in Dereon in a record store, with her daughter in Dereon next to her shopping as well. family, solidarity, style.
...you're telling me there was nothing better than bee-stung lipped 8 year olds who, frankly, look uncomfortable in that ad?
so, despite being one of the first people to know/use the new Noah Brier app (see? see? sneaky cred there right... haha), i haven't commented on it yet. i wanted to say something useful other than 'oh, well, that's cool, check out brand tags.' unfortunately my analysis takes a few days.
"this is really cool."
again with the "duh" moments, it makes sense that how people perceive your brand is what the brand is worth. i learned that in my second year of college. but it was an innovative way to track these thoughts people have around brands.
"this could go really badly."
meaning, anytime you bring '1 word/phrase' + 'anonymity' into the picture, you wind up with some pretty stupid results. but since the feedback works like word clouds (even if the popular words get so big it interferes with my screen), i suppose it evens out. would have been nice to be able to say why, i chose a word, etc, and have those explanations link from the main tag cloud. that way whomever wants to know more is able to do so, and perhaps get perspective on why an experience was great or poor for me. i understand the virtues of the concise nature and the top-of-mind response, but a secondary optional screen asking why would also be helpful.
i don't know if celebtags functions as the Dorian picture to brandtags or vice versa, but the point remains: similar implementation, and yet, the responses are vastly different. what does one say about the other? why does every female celebrity get tagged with slut or whore or bitch? why does this not have a way of asking people to think about their assumptions...?
understandably, thanks to tabloids and the nature of being in the public eye, celebs are more often fodder for malignant feedback than any other entity short of Wal-Mart. and even then, if folks had to choose between hating Paris Hilton or hating Wal-Mart, i'm not sure who would win (lose?). and here, in case you're not sure, you can actually punch out the celebs you hate most. ...yeah. anyway.
similarly, people are brands. that's also another "duh" that not everyone has embraced. like brand value, there are reputations and representations; not always are the two in sync. is hating Paris Hilton the same as hating Wal-Mart? yes and no. even as we try to make brands our "friends" and affable, people-like entities, celebs are actual people. this produces very different top-of-mind results.
Wal-Mart responses run the gamut from american to white trash, south park to nascar, affordable to cheap, evil to value. juxtaposing these statements shows the range of emotion and perception--all of which may be true, but certainly there is a range. things that are affordable to some are low quality to others. evil to some is a necessity in some areas where there are no other supermarkets.
yet, Paris Hilton responses are much more flat and one-sided, ranging from airhead, bimbo, and bitch to sexual references, skank, slut, whore, herpes, and blow job. "rich" appears but small, and "heiress" appears once, but even smaller--only one person said it. this does not by far offer the whole picture, regardless of how you feel about Paris Hilton.
is this because you can interact with a brand and you can't interact with a celebrity? i can walk into a Wal-Mart and have an experience, but i can't party with Paris Hilton. does that give me a more limited understanding of Paris Hilton? or does it not matter--i have perceptions of brands i've never interacted with, like Sonic. we get 5 or 6 Sonic commercials by me and the nearest Sonic is in New Jersey. i have never been in one, but i still have brand thoughts about it. more along the lines of "far away" than "blow job," however.
a parting gift: the George W. Bush worldwide brand.
the site, adgoodness, re: party art Power Plant
Riot saith: YEA!
despite the following comment on the adgoodness post (where you can also see the other 2 in this campaign) -- Although it’s pretty lame photography, and the models them selves are not that interesting. Nor is the scene all that believable in the case of the third one.. It’s a good concept. 3/5 not so much on the execution though. -- i like this campaign. i don't think the photography is particularly 'lame.' it reminds me of a campaign i did for the Museum of Modern Art. as in--trying to make the prospect of a museum not boring to anyone who doesn't already go. making the museum into the party is, i counter, a clever idea. especially when modern and contemporary art lends itself to some wacky and interesting pieces. not to mention, it ties into the fact that they're actually hosting a party, which doubles on its usefulness. kind of like that "go metro. miss traffic" ad.
the site, brandweek, re: targeted ads
Riot saith: DUH!
haven't i been saying this for, oh, say... ever? yes, i think so. "These users want, and welcome, information about new products, savings and other offers, and they're clearly stating that if the ads were more targeted and relevant, it would be worthwhile to them," said Jere Doyle, CEO of Prospectiv. no shit sherlock. we need studies for this? i shouldn't talk. i know it takes a lot to convince people who don't already see that. but i feel like i'm seeing a lot of things quoted, referenced, and studied lately that make me go "DUH!?" isn't that a GIVEN? i'm going to start keeping track of things that make me go "duh" rather than make me say "huh!" am i alone in this feeling? or do people just need validation on the obvious?
the site, greg verdino, re: 'generation v'
Riot saith: NAY!
don't get me wrong. it's truly not all bad. like greg points out, some of my peers don't know what Twitter is. me, i've never used, or wanted to use, Second Life. i don't podcast, even if i know what it is. but to claim that "the generational distinctions break down" online is an unfair and, i believe, flawed generalization. i'm all about connecting human experiences, but you need to understand that each human has a distinct experience they bring to the table. my values are radically different than the generation before me, and no amount of Facebook Chat is going to rectify that. not to mention, HOW each generation comes to the "virtual generation" is different. how and why we interact with it is often different. how we think about it, craft ourselves, to why, and why--all of these are different. my little brother's reason for using Myspace is not my aunt's reason for using Myspace. it's simply not. i think that to fall prey to this idea as a new "generation merger" is a product of living too long in the
social media state of the internet bubble. treating each personae, even if a person has multiple personae, different from a marketing standpoint does have merit. i'm just saying that not everything is that easy, and i do believe digital natives--whether or not they podcast as well as a 35 year old--do come to the virtual table for different reasons, values, and views. technographics is a better answer, to me, than "generation v." i find the umbrella term dangerous.
okay, before i get back in the swing of things, this is entirely unrelated to advertising. feel free to skip if your whole life revolves solely around advertising. there's no shame in that ;)
i am in such a bouncy mood for a monday!
worthy of multiple explanation points!! even. and, moreover, i know why.
summer is knocking down the door and i love it.
i spent part of yesterday making a mix that reminds me of summer for my friend Ell.
i was surprised by how much of it was what i'd deem "mainstream" or popular, especially when i listen to so much underground music. i also had deliberately excluded a lot of my riot grrrl music because i didn't know if she liked it, and, well, if you know that sort of stuff, you know it's a (wonderfully) acquired taste. s-k ftw!
if any of you want to listen to what i'm listening to--
which i'm sure many of you shall roll your eyes at, but hey, i gave fair warning of the candylike nature of this mix. moreover, it's equally able to rot your teeth and make you hyper--but that's the point. try it. you might like it. and if you don't and a coworker overhears, just say a colleague is a secret scene queen and it's not your fault.
01. We Were Made For Each Other / You Can Breathe Now - Jack's Mannequin
02. Nine in the Afternoon - Panic! at the Disco
03. Of All the Gin Joints in All the World - Fall Out Boy
04. I Want You To Want Me - Letters to Cleo
05. Anyway You Want It - Rise Against!
06. Amphetamine - Everclear
07. Everything is Alright - Motion City Soundtrack
08. Out Here All Night - Damone
09. Shut Up and Let Me Go - The Ting Tings
10. Phenomena - Yeah Yeah Yeahs
11. Faster Kill Pussycat - Paul Oakenfield ft. Brittany Murphy
12. Le Disko - Shiny Toy Guns
13. Twitch - Bif Naked
14. Glow - Alien Ant Farm
15. Set Phasers to Stun - Taking Back Sunday
16. Praise Chorus - Jimmy Eat World
17. Blue Carolina - Alkaline Trio
18. Born For This - Paramore
What songs make you bouncy and happy? Any genre! I want to know. I love to bounce in the summer. Bring it on <3 Please!
i don't have time to post today, sorry; very busy.
in consolation, a very disturbing post for your pondering mind to ponder this friday afternoon.
i am cranky about this and i even purchase all my music. this is effed up.
where's the line?
...Preferred by Tweeting Advertisers Following Me.
[as if that wasn't enough qualifiers, right?]
as those who follow me on Twitter know, i often pose a "question of the day." because Riot is a naturally curious creature who enjoys opinions. and i would not have even made this post, except the product today was greatly amusing. not to mention, top-10 lists get mentioned, and this doesn't really need to be mentioned, heh. plus, i like the number 9 better.
in order of most votes, and then, by alphabetical:
if you could (without threat to your mortality or the endangered species list) befriend any animal for your own, which would you choose?
#9: Whale [@johnny_bones]
#8: Trent Reznor [@strawberrycough]
#7: Tiger [@thegirlriot]
#6: Shark [@dailybiz]
#5: Polar Bear [@HookEmSarah]
#4: Panda [@griner]
#3: Lemur [@mtlb]
#2: Anubis [@demandjustice]
...#1: Platypus! [@beatrixmarie @mugs]
from this, we can deduce that we are either strange, cuddly, aquatic, or want to kill you. i suppose that's about right.
feeling under-represented? cast your personal animal vote here! heh. peace out for the day!
i love advertising. i also love protesting. i've protested many a thing in many a strange fashion (or state of unfashion, as the case may have been! bwuahaha, oh crazy times in NYC. anyway.).
i hate stupid advertising. i'm not saying piss-poor advertising where you know the budget wasn't high. i'm saying advertising without a thought process. incongruent advertising. hate that. hate hate hate. (take that twistori <3)
but i hate stupid protesting more. if that's even possible. like for example this shining gem for america's "offical" language. but okay. mistakes happen. even really stupid mistakes happen.
but one that shows you carefully thought out being stupid? FAIL.
this i found while browsing Adages, which always is or finds stupid things.
Mark Dice and his group -- which calls itself -- "The Resistance" will be boycotting Starbucks for its sluttly mermaid. "The Starbucks logo has a naked woman on it with her legs spread like a prostitute," explains Dice in his press release. "Need I say more? It's extremely poor taste, and the company might as well call themselves, Slutbucks."
[...]The mermaid's boobies are covered by her hair. As she is a mermaid, she ain't got no legs to spread. (Though Dice claims she is a Siren, not a mermaid).
errr, Dice? ...do you even know what a siren is?
...cos they are freakin' half-bird women. so sure, yeah, they could spread 'em if they liked--except that part's usually avian. and even if you want to get happy and make it a chick with wings, the Starbucks logo clearly isn't wings. clearly. it could be many things, but unless you failed a Rorschach test, it's certainly not wings. and don't give me that a siren and a mermaid are the same thing. they're not. even if they were, that would be an even stupider reason for Dice to use the "siren" tag as a defense of his extensive foray into moronic representation. if you can't get your mythology straight, check it with someone who can. seriously.
[an interlude, not about advertising, but about my psychosis.]
as if you couldn't tell by the way i have what some might consider too many "l"s in my words, or an extraneous "u" here or there, and my infatuation with the word "bloody." blame monty python. i don't care.
the secret's out.
but, dailybiz, this one's for you. a glimpse into just how anal i am.
for an experiment, i have changed my usual date formatting (08.05.08) to another one, wherein the month appears first (05.08.2008).
i do not claim to keep it. there are way too many numbers. it bothers me. not as much as every other format, which is why i'm experimenting at your suggestion. but it's just... so uneven! ideally i'd take 05.08.08, but no suck luck. and yes, i need the "."s. they're authentic to my self-representation. i don't like slashes.
so there it is then.
ridiculous Riot thoughts.
and how much you really didn't need to know that i'd actually thought about it.
you, right there--i want you to be my follow-friend. i think we have many things in common. we share similar tastes in music. i find your tweets to be funny and informative. your style in clothing rocks my socks. i'm jealous of your profession. i feel that i can contribute to the conversations you tend to have. aren't you at all curious?
i can't tell someone on twitter how much i really think we should talk, even if i wanted to.
because if i follow you, and you don't follow me back, i can't DM (direct message) you and tell you i'm not creepy. that i'm not a spambot. and that i'm actually interested in what you have to say. even if you're not interested in what i'm tweeting about, that extra mile might ensure some form of open communication. you know, one of the points of twitter, right?
i completely understand about not accepting followers you don't know or who aren't friends of your friends (and thus you don't get 'recommendation points'). the internets are a creepy place. but if you're on a connective medium, if i go the extra mile, wouldn't you maybe want to talk to me? even just a preliminary chat to feel out whether or not i take it back and actually think you're a douchebag?
my point is: you can DM only those who are following you. what about the other direction of communication?
there IS a block button. if you hate me that much, you CAN block me. it's not like letting me DM anyone i want is an automatic death threat. some people get way too many follows a day. naturally they may not want to add you. moreover, many people don't get notifications, and won't know if you've added them (and that they may possibly want to add you back). replying @them doesn't help unless they click their 'Replies' mask, as non-followed people don't show up in the main feed.
i could follow you, really want to contribute, and you could never know i even exist. not even in an emo way. in a programming way. and if there's no accessible email, blog, etc, then the whole thing seems rather silly. just saying. i'm not suggesting the followee/follower ratio be mandated, like with Facebook, where it has to be mutual. i respect your choice not to follow me. but i'd like a fair shot. why can't I DM? it's like the elevator pitch of friendship. or something.
[updated fact adjustment]
i'm beginning premature analysis and first impressions of thoughts surrounding Twistori, a project by Amy Hoy and Thomas Fuchs inspired by the previous We Feel Fine applet. i began using it the other day.
[/updated fact adjustment]
i am in love with these sites. i think i find them reassuring in a personal way without feeling intrusive. when i read "#I believe that the secrets of life are at the bottom of my coffee mug. I must investigate," i don't need to know who wrote it, how old they are, where they're from, or how they identify.
i find connection because it is a familiar thought consideration (belief) in a familiar sentiment (in unexpected places) with a personal addition ('i must investigate'). the phrase offers me comfort. i can commiserate and appreciate it. in the same way that i can appreciate, "#I love grapefruit...it tastes like Summer" and "#I HATE YOU STAPLER, HATE HATE."
simple phrases (i love, i hate, i think, i believe, i feel, i wish) are some of the most intrinsic building blocks for opening communication between two people because it at once shows a vulnerability (telling something about oneself) at the same time as offering it up for empathy (chances are you can relate to most of what appears).
but what does this mean?
it means i can reach out to people and find reassurance without their knowing it. without having to consider how they might feel about how i feel about their words. it's a selfish act of self-therapy, to, at its basest, simply know i'm not alone. i can know that i share so many things with so many people i've never met, and moreover, never have to meet.
i don't need to share my life story with them on Facebook chat. i can take it at face value and appreciate the common threads of human existence, which make me feel small and part of a larger whole, but in a reassuring way rather than a depressing one. it's not complex enough that i have to start asking myself deeper analytical questions about the nature of the statements.
i can just watch the world unfold around me in this faux sense of digital peace. it's pixelated zen. connection without judgment or responsibility. i'm not saying it forgoes human interaction, but it helps as a mental supplement. i don't know if this is the product of an internet disconnected generation, finding connections without faces, or if this is a human instinct to want to feel.
"#I believe this week is killing me."
and i just think we can all use a little zen.
[this will likely be considered again the more i dwell on and use Twistori.]
why should the Internets be any different?
rock on, Atmosphere. rock on. good music and good fun!
what would you creatively vandalize if given the chance?
me, i made an homage to my alma mater.
@dailybiz, thanks for referring a good time ;)
this is the first official post of project Lovefool, wherein i promised i would:
"post about how much i love your brand. why i love your brand. and how much i'm willing to talk about how much i love your brand."
target #1: To Write Love on Her Arms.
why you should care:
unless you're entirely apathetic, have never been depressed, have never known anyone who was depressed, was never a child, never had children, and hate teenagers, you should help this cause. from their FAQ:
Q.What is To Write Love on Her Arms?
A. TWLOHA is a non-profit movement dedicated to presenting hope and finding help for those struggling with depression, addiction, self-injury and suicide. TWLOHA exists to encourage, inform, inspire, and also to invest directly into treatment and recovery.
Q: How did TWLOHA start?
A: To Write Love on Her Arms began in Orlando, FL in February 2006 as a (written) story, the true story of five days spent with a friend who was denied entry into a drug treatment center. The story was a look at those five days, and the t-shirts were printed and sold initially as a way to pay for our friend's treatment.
why i love them:
the phrase "to write love on her arms" directly responds to the tendency of many young girls(/people) to cut their arms with razors (for a multitude of reasons). having helped many of my friends through this in our teenage years, and, having had my younger (HS aged) brother recently ask me why his friends were cutting, i believe that this organization is doing a great thing. it's giving hope and voice to a situation previously beyond (what we felt was in) our control.
how much i'm willing to talk about how much i love them:
i bought 2 tee shirts and a button pack to help fund them ($35 +S&H) so i can wear the message and talk about it in real life. i tweeted about it earlier today, and now i'm writing a blog post about it, hoping to get others to also see the value in the endeavor. to help lift up the young folks that many of our firms target for the next it-toy. as self-value plummets in teenage years leading to a multitude of situations, some created by the very media we sell, the least you can do is buy a button pack ($5) and speak up when someone asks you what "to write love on her arms" means on your stylish ironic tee shirt. please spread the word.
how much i love them/aka/the backstory:
! i first saw the phrase on "to write love on her arms" a tee shirt of a random person photographed online via google. as a poet and lover of words, the phrase stuck with me. i simply liked it. i decided that i was going to, at a later point when i had funds, scour the internet for whatever that shirt was a purchase one.
! before i could acquire the funds to do that, i had been saving up for this past weekend, where i went to the 2 day music festival Bamboozle with my friend Amanda of @reverieapparel. i was pretty much a scene queen for 2 days. it was wicked awesome. anyway.
! while i was there, i saw a shitload of young scene kids wearing these shirts. i had no idea why. i'd never seen one in real life before. confused, i turned to Amanda, who knew of my previous love of the shirt, and said, "wtf?" basically.
! Amanda told me that she had 2 or 3 of the shirts herself and that it was actually a product of a non profit organization dedicated to helping people in need battle depression, addiction, and all the malevolent behaviors that go with it. that made me love it more.
1] Facebook helps raise a revolt, inadvertently of course. "Egyptians are using the online social networking tool Facebook to defy the government's attempt to muzzle the media and hush recent incidents of police brutality during a strike by workers in a town in the Nile Delta." rock on. one more positive aspect, right up there with the kid who used Twitter to get out of a foreign jail by tweeting "arrested"--and, more personally, when a kid went missing at my alma mater last weekend and the cops wouldn't do anything about it for 72 hours, the kids organized search parties and raised awareness via Facebook.
2] in other news, New York doesn't need any more bloody taxes, give me a break. i hope the bill goes down in flames.
3] also, i can't decide, at all. what book would you save? if you could reinvent the canon, decide that for the future THESE were the books that would matter, what would your canon look like?
some of my choices:
- to kill a mockingbird
- fight club
- house of leaves
- written on the body
- the great gatsby
- lord of the flies
- brave new world
- alice's adventures in wonderland
will revisit this when i get home and look at my bookshelf. i am not including works of poetry, plays, or anthologies. because then it would be even longer, as i love poetry and drama. like copenhagen and arcadia.
4] i love this. i love it i love it i love it. i love it so much that i can't even readily articulate why exactly i love it so much. i'm sure i will analyze and get back to you. must sit and ponder and draw connections and relate and commiserate. yes.