<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Krywosa, IMC</title>
	<atom:link href="http://krywosa.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://krywosa.com</link>
	<description>Integrated Marketing Communication</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 04:16:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Facebook: New Media Teacher by David L. Mulder</title>
		<link>http://krywosa.com/2009/10/26/facebook-new-media-teacher/#comment-327</link>
		<dc:creator>David L. Mulder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 04:16:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krywosa.com/?p=363#comment-327</guid>
		<description>Facebook seems to be branding their application as one that&#039;s not afraid to change. I think these iterative changes are easier for the userbase to absorb; all those knee-jerk backlash groups that show up seem silly to me. 

The iterative model for development seems to be one that more and more applications are taking. I don&#039;t think it&#039;s necessarily intended to create a more readily adaptable public, but that outcome is an apparent byproduct.

What&#039;s interesting to me is that as people become used to that (frequent smaller updates to design &amp; functionality), will they expect it everywhere else? Most college web design groups wait years between major revisions. If their Facebook-savvy userbase starts to get tired of the same design after a few months, that could have a significant impact on design processes across the Web.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Facebook seems to be branding their application as one that&#8217;s not afraid to change. I think these iterative changes are easier for the userbase to absorb; all those knee-jerk backlash groups that show up seem silly to me. </p>
<p>The iterative model for development seems to be one that more and more applications are taking. I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s necessarily intended to create a more readily adaptable public, but that outcome is an apparent byproduct.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s interesting to me is that as people become used to that (frequent smaller updates to design &amp; functionality), will they expect it everywhere else? Most college web design groups wait years between major revisions. If their Facebook-savvy userbase starts to get tired of the same design after a few months, that could have a significant impact on design processes across the Web.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Facebook: New Media Teacher by TimN</title>
		<link>http://krywosa.com/2009/10/26/facebook-new-media-teacher/#comment-326</link>
		<dc:creator>TimN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:41:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krywosa.com/?p=363#comment-326</guid>
		<description>After their previous redesign, I seem to recall blogging that, while I may or may not agree with all their changes, I admire that they are constantly trying to improve their product. Granted, it seems yet another way to drive up pageviews and advertising traffic, but Facebook continues to venture into an increasingly media-rich environment and try to innovate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After their previous redesign, I seem to recall blogging that, while I may or may not agree with all their changes, I admire that they are constantly trying to improve their product. Granted, it seems yet another way to drive up pageviews and advertising traffic, but Facebook continues to venture into an increasingly media-rich environment and try to innovate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Forget PR, Its Marketing Thats Dead&#8230; by insidetimshead</title>
		<link>http://krywosa.com/2009/10/23/forget-pr-its-marketing-thats-dead/#comment-324</link>
		<dc:creator>insidetimshead</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 13:33:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krywosa.com/?p=354#comment-324</guid>
		<description>Agreed. The whole point of my talk today is that we longer hold a megaphone. We own a souped-up version of a telephone that connects us instantaneously day and night with people across the globe. And those who venture hamhandedly into social media without authenticity do so at their own peril; a good example being the WalMartAcrossAmerica hoax with fake bloggers pretending to cheer for WalMart but established by a PR agency. Pay-for-play bloggers, astroturfing and Twitterspamming when done poorly (which it so often is) is worse than not marketing at all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed. The whole point of my talk today is that we longer hold a megaphone. We own a souped-up version of a telephone that connects us instantaneously day and night with people across the globe. And those who venture hamhandedly into social media without authenticity do so at their own peril; a good example being the WalMartAcrossAmerica hoax with fake bloggers pretending to cheer for WalMart but established by a PR agency. Pay-for-play bloggers, astroturfing and Twitterspamming when done poorly (which it so often is) is worse than not marketing at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Do Vanity/Specific URL&#8217;s Matter Anymore? by christine turnier</title>
		<link>http://krywosa.com/2009/10/22/do-vanityspecific-urls-matter-anymore/#comment-323</link>
		<dc:creator>christine turnier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:03:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krywosa.com/?p=350#comment-323</guid>
		<description>Um... NO, they don&#039;t matter anymore.  Not unless you are doing a substaintial print campaign that is specifically driving people to a landing page or website. Otherwise, with a lot of marketing activity moving online, I think the vanities are a &quot;nice to have&quot; but not a &quot;need to have.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Um&#8230; NO, they don&#8217;t matter anymore.  Not unless you are doing a substaintial print campaign that is specifically driving people to a landing page or website. Otherwise, with a lot of marketing activity moving online, I think the vanities are a &#8220;nice to have&#8221; but not a &#8220;need to have.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Music: Its Alive! by TimN</title>
		<link>http://krywosa.com/2009/10/22/music-its-alive/#comment-321</link>
		<dc:creator>TimN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:33:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krywosa.com/?p=343#comment-321</guid>
		<description>The trouble with the music industry is that they&#039;ve been wanting to follow the gatekeeper model for so long, and ignored the demands of the market and musicians, that we&#039;re now seeing the deluge. It was musicians -- not record companies -- who pushed the access model by streaming tunes live on MySpace, making whole albums available for free on the Internet, by realizing that getting their music out there, not hoarding it, was the best way to win fans.

And like in anything else, once competition begins, everyone wants in. When free is the new currency, everyone joins the gold rush.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The trouble with the music industry is that they&#8217;ve been wanting to follow the gatekeeper model for so long, and ignored the demands of the market and musicians, that we&#8217;re now seeing the deluge. It was musicians &#8212; not record companies &#8212; who pushed the access model by streaming tunes live on MySpace, making whole albums available for free on the Internet, by realizing that getting their music out there, not hoarding it, was the best way to win fans.</p>
<p>And like in anything else, once competition begins, everyone wants in. When free is the new currency, everyone joins the gold rush.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Music: Its Alive! by Andrew Careaga</title>
		<link>http://krywosa.com/2009/10/22/music-its-alive/#comment-320</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Careaga</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:24:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krywosa.com/?p=343#comment-320</guid>
		<description>You&#039;ve been tearing up the Google Reader. Wowsah. Yes, it&#039;s good to see more musical innovations in the social mediasphere. About time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;ve been tearing up the Google Reader. Wowsah. Yes, it&#8217;s good to see more musical innovations in the social mediasphere. About time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on I&#8217;m Not Not Working, I&#8217;m Integrated&#8230; by Andrew Careaga</title>
		<link>http://krywosa.com/2009/10/15/im-not-not-working-im-integrated/#comment-319</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Careaga</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:17:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krywosa.com/?p=329#comment-319</guid>
		<description>Jess - This is an issue I&#039;ve struggled with, both as a middle manager and as an advocate and user of social media. As a middle manager, I&#039;m in the position of having to sell higher-ups (all of whom are Boomers or older) on the value of social media for communicating with various audiences, and also trying to bring a multi-generational staff into cohesion on where and how social media fits into our work. One Gen Xer on staff is a brilliant blogger, and he contributes more to our research blog than the rest of us, combined. He finally got on board with Facebook, but he won&#039;t touch Twitter. Another Boomer (just a few years older than I) LOVES Facebook but for non-work reasons only, and won&#039;t embrace management of the university&#039;s Facebook page. (Yeah, I know I&#039;m stereotyping generations, and I read your post about that. Shame on me. But you get the point. ;) )

The fact of the matter is that social media is here, and we&#039;d better learn to deal with it and to use it effectively to accomplish our goals.

As for the value of social media: There&#039;s always going to be clutter, just as in any media. We need to filter out the quiz requests, spam tweets and all the other crap, just as we do with traditional media (via channel-surfing, turning the page, etc.).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jess &#8211; This is an issue I&#8217;ve struggled with, both as a middle manager and as an advocate and user of social media. As a middle manager, I&#8217;m in the position of having to sell higher-ups (all of whom are Boomers or older) on the value of social media for communicating with various audiences, and also trying to bring a multi-generational staff into cohesion on where and how social media fits into our work. One Gen Xer on staff is a brilliant blogger, and he contributes more to our research blog than the rest of us, combined. He finally got on board with Facebook, but he won&#8217;t touch Twitter. Another Boomer (just a few years older than I) LOVES Facebook but for non-work reasons only, and won&#8217;t embrace management of the university&#8217;s Facebook page. (Yeah, I know I&#8217;m stereotyping generations, and I read your post about that. Shame on me. But you get the point. <img src='http://s.wordpress.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' />  )</p>
<p>The fact of the matter is that social media is here, and we&#8217;d better learn to deal with it and to use it effectively to accomplish our goals.</p>
<p>As for the value of social media: There&#8217;s always going to be clutter, just as in any media. We need to filter out the quiz requests, spam tweets and all the other crap, just as we do with traditional media (via channel-surfing, turning the page, etc.).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Blogging: Dont Make It A Big Deal by TimN</title>
		<link>http://krywosa.com/2009/10/19/blogging-dont-make-it-a-big-deal/#comment-318</link>
		<dc:creator>TimN</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:16:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krywosa.com/?p=339#comment-318</guid>
		<description>Hi, I&#039;m Tim and I&#039;m a recovering blogoholic. I was doing pretty well over at Xanga (remember Xanga?), had about 220 subscribers, could routinely get more than 20 comments on entries. Blogged four times a week on a self-imposed schedule featuring something called a Thursday Tipsheet, an exhaustive (and exhausting) roundup of the week&#039;s events. People complained if it wasn&#039;t up first thing in the morning, and being a perfectionist I&#039;d lose sleep working on it. When I realized the blog was running me, not vice versa, I had to call off the Thursday Tipsheet and scale back.

Two things recharged me: 1) Surrendering what seemed like a publishing schedule meant I didn&#039;t pressure myself into producing for the sake of production, and 2) I met new world of people on Twitter (@jesskry included) who turned me toward the new blog on communication (or writing, words and the Web, as I say) that provided a fresh outlet with a seemingly endless supply of material. And whether I update once or twice -- or no -- times a week, I can now enjoy blogging again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, I&#8217;m Tim and I&#8217;m a recovering blogoholic. I was doing pretty well over at Xanga (remember Xanga?), had about 220 subscribers, could routinely get more than 20 comments on entries. Blogged four times a week on a self-imposed schedule featuring something called a Thursday Tipsheet, an exhaustive (and exhausting) roundup of the week&#8217;s events. People complained if it wasn&#8217;t up first thing in the morning, and being a perfectionist I&#8217;d lose sleep working on it. When I realized the blog was running me, not vice versa, I had to call off the Thursday Tipsheet and scale back.</p>
<p>Two things recharged me: 1) Surrendering what seemed like a publishing schedule meant I didn&#8217;t pressure myself into producing for the sake of production, and 2) I met new world of people on Twitter (@jesskry included) who turned me toward the new blog on communication (or writing, words and the Web, as I say) that provided a fresh outlet with a seemingly endless supply of material. And whether I update once or twice &#8212; or no &#8212; times a week, I can now enjoy blogging again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on I&#8217;m Not Not Working, I&#8217;m Integrated&#8230; by RM</title>
		<link>http://krywosa.com/2009/10/15/im-not-not-working-im-integrated/#comment-317</link>
		<dc:creator>RM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:35:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krywosa.com/?p=329#comment-317</guid>
		<description>I can understand using social networking, as you describe above, if you&#039;re in a profession that can benefit from the real-time knowledge and connections.  If it is such a value to your company/profession, then you should take the time to explain, logically, to your boss and co-workers the value in the way you use it.  I&#039;m all for social networking, if there truly is a benefit to the company.  As for professional development, unless the company is in the habit of paying for training and other forms of employee development, then fine.  If not, then professional development should be done on one&#039;s own time and not company time.  One&#039;s development is mostly an asset to oneself and a personal responsibility.

However, in my experience, that&#039;s not what happens.  Many people get &quot;addicted&quot; to their Facebook status and Twitter updates and lose touch with the real world.  I know someone recently who almost lost their kids because he and his wife would spend all their time on the internet and not clean house or properly take care of their kids.

The employees at my company who have been reprimanded for using the internet improperly are usually posting junk to their &quot;pages&quot; that is neither beneficial to the company nor professional in nature.  They post pictures of their party weekend in San Diego, on the company&#039;s dime.  They use IM to gossip with their friends, who are also supposed to be working, which means two companies are losing money and productivity because of it.  These same time-wasting employees then complain about their paychecks and/or the lack of commissions they receive.  If they had spent more time making their sales calls, instead of gossiping with friends or blogging about how drunk they got last weekend, then maybe their commission checks wouldn&#039;t look so pathetic.

I&#039;ve tried Facebook and see no value in it.  It&#039;s a big time waster and the only networking I get from it is requests to take the latest quiz or help my friends in whatever online game they&#039;re playing.  I&#039;ve got better things to do, like write a thoughtful email to a friend, play Stratego with my kids, or exercise my pet.  I&#039;m 35 and I love technology, but sometimes the best way to use technology is to simply turn it off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can understand using social networking, as you describe above, if you&#8217;re in a profession that can benefit from the real-time knowledge and connections.  If it is such a value to your company/profession, then you should take the time to explain, logically, to your boss and co-workers the value in the way you use it.  I&#8217;m all for social networking, if there truly is a benefit to the company.  As for professional development, unless the company is in the habit of paying for training and other forms of employee development, then fine.  If not, then professional development should be done on one&#8217;s own time and not company time.  One&#8217;s development is mostly an asset to oneself and a personal responsibility.</p>
<p>However, in my experience, that&#8217;s not what happens.  Many people get &#8220;addicted&#8221; to their Facebook status and Twitter updates and lose touch with the real world.  I know someone recently who almost lost their kids because he and his wife would spend all their time on the internet and not clean house or properly take care of their kids.</p>
<p>The employees at my company who have been reprimanded for using the internet improperly are usually posting junk to their &#8220;pages&#8221; that is neither beneficial to the company nor professional in nature.  They post pictures of their party weekend in San Diego, on the company&#8217;s dime.  They use IM to gossip with their friends, who are also supposed to be working, which means two companies are losing money and productivity because of it.  These same time-wasting employees then complain about their paychecks and/or the lack of commissions they receive.  If they had spent more time making their sales calls, instead of gossiping with friends or blogging about how drunk they got last weekend, then maybe their commission checks wouldn&#8217;t look so pathetic.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve tried Facebook and see no value in it.  It&#8217;s a big time waster and the only networking I get from it is requests to take the latest quiz or help my friends in whatever online game they&#8217;re playing.  I&#8217;ve got better things to do, like write a thoughtful email to a friend, play Stratego with my kids, or exercise my pet.  I&#8217;m 35 and I love technology, but sometimes the best way to use technology is to simply turn it off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Millennials and Virgos: Excluding the Underserved and Unpopular by Lane J</title>
		<link>http://krywosa.com/2009/10/16/millennials-and-virgos-excluding-the-underserved-and-unpopular/#comment-315</link>
		<dc:creator>Lane J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2009 17:14:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://krywosa.com/?p=332#comment-315</guid>
		<description>I tend not to read many articles about Millennials, but the &quot;Millenial Muddle&quot; article caught my attention.  The article stated millenials are &quot;people born between 1982 and 2004&quot; Seriously?!  You can not group people born in three different decades together.  It&#039;s like marketing to people in different countries.  They look for different things.  The millennial profile of &quot;white, affluent teenagers who accomplish great things as they grow up in the suburbs, who confront anxiety when applying into super-selective colleges, and who multitask with ease as their helicopter parents hover reassuringly above them&quot; is only a fraction of the people born between &#039;82 and &#039;04.  Find what your audience has in common and leverage that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I tend not to read many articles about Millennials, but the &#8220;Millenial Muddle&#8221; article caught my attention.  The article stated millenials are &#8220;people born between 1982 and 2004&#8243; Seriously?!  You can not group people born in three different decades together.  It&#8217;s like marketing to people in different countries.  They look for different things.  The millennial profile of &#8220;white, affluent teenagers who accomplish great things as they grow up in the suburbs, who confront anxiety when applying into super-selective colleges, and who multitask with ease as their helicopter parents hover reassuringly above them&#8221; is only a fraction of the people born between &#8216;82 and &#8216;04.  Find what your audience has in common and leverage that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
