I'm going to this. You should too..

Thanks to FutureShape. Usual rules apply.

Thought I should put this out to any plannersphere folk who haven't seen this yet.

It promises to be good fun. Hope to see you all on Thursday.

THIS is why advertising inspires me...

Via Agency Spy.

I have no idea what you are talking about.....

I've been after an excuse to post that for ages.

Being an ex-English student, I know a little about words. How they can illuminate, beguile, inform and (perhaps most importantly) thoroughly thoroughly confuse people. (Anyone who has ever sat through a Postmodernism or Structuralism lecture knows what I'm talking about).

And it's this last point I wanted to blog about today. Yes, it's time for me to take my spelling Nazi hat off and put the language Nazi hat on.

More specifically, in house language - that is to say, how ad agencies/marketeers talk internally (sparked by reading this article co-written by Gareth Kay).

These days, it seems that both parties have borrowed a turn of phrase from the masters of bullshit. Yes, the management consultant. I've heard the following at various places:

'How can we best incentivise the consumer to purchase the variant?'

'We really need to drill down into this problem'

'So how can we own the sector?'

'All I want.....is to break down the underlying paradigm'

Nonsense, isn't it?

How in God's name can we hope to understand real people if we talk in such a bloody stupid manner?

The brilliant Dilbert. Usual rules apply.

Don't worry, this disease isn't that wide spread...yet. That said, I don't want to have to break out the bullshit bingo cards (which we actually did in a former, non advertising job of mine) if I can help it.

And while I'm not wholly convinced by the notion of not calling consumers consumers (in fact, any term you give them won't cover all the bases if you are referring to people who buy your product or service) or not referring to 'brand' because it's been exhausted, there's definitely room in the industry for being as straightforward when talking internally.

Planners, I think (and yes, I include myself in this camp) are incredibly culpable, if they let their heads get away from them. As Rob notes, spending time with just planners isn't healthy - not saying that they aren't lovely, but you lose touch with people who a) don't live in London and b) don't obsess/care about brands and branding. It's a defence mechanism, but one which should be shed - I would hate to be carted out as a planning stereotype, the 'clever one' who is brought in to sprinkle a little intellectual fairy dust on things. And it's not going to happen, if I can help it. I'm going to be straight forward.

Indeed, language is why I like these sites. Both make you acutely aware of the fallacies of misusing words and generally being out of touch with reality.

And yes, there are times that a complex, multi-faceted word has to be used. But if it doesn't, pay attention to Orwell's essay on Politics and the English Language. Speak to me in a language which is used by normal people, and cut out the unneccessary verbosity.

I think the best advertisers and marketeers instinctively get this, and realise that language doesn't have to err on the over-simplistic side; if used correctly, it can create worlds in people's minds. And surely that's what we all want?

NB: The bunny comes from a random story. Check it out. It's bloody interesting.

Growing Up Online...

No, I didn't look like this when I was younger, sadly. I was far fatter.

Yes readers, it's time for my annual (or monthly) blog post about how blogging changes you, and how the theme of your blog changes with you.

This post was sparked by a conversation I had with Mr Punk Planning himself; we had a really interesting discussion about blogging, life, the universe, mid 90's Premiership footballers, setsquares, and everything in between.

I left the conversation thanking God I hadn't started blogging when I was much younger. Any self-regulatory skills I may have now weren't really all there then. My generation is the first one where we have everything documented, tagged, written about and generally publicised. Citizen journalism, it seems to me, leaves you nowhere to hide.

Also, I really don't like the notion of a 'Plannersphere Mafia' either, where if you don't blog you aren't good at your job, or you have nothing to say - some people just value their personal and professional privacy more than others, which is fine. Easy to understand as well, when blogging demolishes the public/private debate - the whole world can peer in if they wish.

And I found that I'm more divided than I thought on the topic of blogging. On the one hand I like the fact that I can write my point of view, meet with incredibly intelligent thinkers either virtually or in real life, and hell, get a job in part due to what I write here (the latter is bloody great, in fact), but, being pessimistic for a moment, it means I have nowhere to run. Thank goodness I work in advertising, where wearing silly Wall St inspired fancy dress is positively encouraged (especially in some modern day agency briefings, it would seem).

I sometimes resent people being able to learn about me and how my thinking has evolved - after all, this is just a storage box for thinking, which in itself is continually changing - there's the worry that someone will read something I've written in mid-2006 and take it as read that I still think the same (I've finally dropped the notion that the world is flat, for example).

Perhaps I should add more of a disclaimer before people enter the site? Heh. No, I'll continue to blog and write about things I enjoy and find interesting.

Going forward from the conversation I had with Charles, I had a rude awakening the other day about how if someone is one of my Facebook friends, they can find out all sorts of things. It happened when someone added me (don't worry, my privacy settings are set appropriately) who I didn't know. Not thinking about it, I accepted their invitation. Happily, it was a name I knew (lost in the mists of time), but it might not have been - it could have been a spammer or someone else.

It got me thinking to be careful who I add and who I don't. The danger is that you get carried away with being super-social and lose sight of your personal security, and personality in general - ie, you become so stretched that you lose sight of your core values.

I don't mind people knowing what I'm doing, but sometimes it's nice to make mistakes in private. And I'm sure I'll make one or two (or a hatful) as I continue to grow up, both personally and professionally. Over-use of Twitter seems to be one at the moment - it's the social equivalent of comfort eating for me.

You see, my blog isn't quite a warts and all expose of what I did on a Sunday, nor a highly polished, professional manifesto or online CV. It attempted to be the latter in the beginning, but I realised that it's just not human, or honest.

Additionally, I'm not a planning director, nor am I attempting to solve the industry's problems with this blog. I'm just projecting a series of ever changing thoughts and ideas, throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks. Some things re-emerge over time, but by and large, it's what I've just thought, off the top of my head (it's also why it's not that well written, to be honest).

All this bloggery/self promotion/communication is what it is. And it's nice to show on the blog/facebook/twitter that I am a 'real' person away from the day job, even if I might talk too much sometimes.

Indeed, it'll be fascinating to imagine what business is general will be like in the next twenty years, with the rise of these people who've gone through a similar process to me. Personally, I think those who are willing to self publish will help push the boundaries of what's out there, and those who don't will be a little bit more reluctant to early-adopt newer things. Neither is bad, it must be stressed again. Interestingly, all the bloggers that I've met, without question, are keen to use technology to improve the world, and use every form of communication to help widen their knowledge.

Charles nails it here when he says that "there really is no better social research than socialising." And I've got to agree. It's helped me grow up a lot in the last year and a bit.

I WAS going to go home this weekend..

This is where I used to go swimming when I was little. There's a pool inside and out now..

Well, I had a lovely long weekend planned. But oh no. Global warming intervened.

It began at 4pm on Friday. After having too many teas/talking large amounts of rubbish in the Breakfast Club, I went back to my flat to prepare to go home.

Got a call from my folks. Ah, so that little bit of flash flooding in London (lasted about 10/15 minutes) has actually been going on all day. Oh dear.

Still, like a mug, I went to Paddington to pick up my tickets. No dice.

Not really surprising when you think that this was the situation Saturday morning. Yes, Pershore is about 10 minutes from my house at home (in fact, it's where I went to school when I was a wee nipper).

Compounding my status as a mug, I tried again. Still nothing (click this link to see what the train line looked like - picture twelve). However, watching the massive scrummage to get on the Bristol train was a joy to behold, and fully restored my faith in small, determined elderly people who got their way through with the odd cheeky elbow.

Upton Upon Severn. Nicked from the BBC (Daniel Berehulak), usual rules apply.

And it got worse. Upton Upon Severn, for those who click on the link and learn about it, is again, about 10 minutes away from where I live. It's where my Grandma used to live. Happily, she doesn't any more, or that house would be a write off (as it is, it can't get insurance any more, as it floods so frequently).

So no, I didn't go home this weekend.

And it's still pretty bloody terrible near where I live (Worcester/Gloucester border, quite near Tewkesbury). Some people I know have no fresh water or electricity. Here's hoping the emergency services can help.

Things like this make you realise that it's all very well to worry about the environment, and global warming, but we need to DO SOMETHING. I'm as ignorant as the next person, but when something like this happens on a local level, it should serve as a sobering wake up call.

No bullshit. Just listen to the scientists, and get prepared for more monsoons - lessons must be learned.

And yes, family Humphrey are just fine. Albeit a bit shaken and concerned by it all.

This is fairly dark stuff for a Monday - don't worry, I shall resume more advertising/nonsense writing shortly.

There's no smoke without fire.....

Thanks to Mark_Skinner 1. Usual rules apply.

If you believe some of the figures, there's never been a tougher time to work in an advertising agency. Take a look at this article. And with the likes of the cheeky Zeroinfluencer and his new project (detailed here by Bowbrick), branded entertainment is coming to the fore, allowing people to choose what they'd like to see in the next episode.

Scary?

Well, I've met the erstwhile Mr Bausola. He's not a frightening man (unless he's just missed Happy Hour). And I applaud him for what he's doing. I think it's the future. And a hearty well done to Ford as well - kudos for rising to the challenge;I doubt it's a coincidence that the last few Ford TV spots have been a lot more thoughtful and provocative. In fact, have a look yourself:



But I want to move away from the (frankly boring) debate about advertising's effectiveness. I'm firmly (and you'd expect as much, considering the title of this blog) in the camp that well produced, planned and above all, interesting work will stimulate a positive response.

But the nature of the work is changing. Indeed, the title of this post is deliberately misleading - I think a lot of advertising agencies and clients will have to wake up to the new worlds that Imagination and co talk about. But at the same time, for some products and services, it may not be the right approach. It's just another way to positively provoke your audience, and one which (I think), is dead right for Ford - who needs another car shot and overarching promises? Far better to entertain first and tie it into a bigger brand thought, a la Honda.

Thanks to the nice people at Modern Mechanix for this. Usual rules apply.

The fact of the matter is, though margins may be tighter, and the likes of TV spend are at a 5 year low, I don't think there's ever been a more exciting time to be working in the business (NB: This is said by every idealistic 23 year old planner, I'm sure). It's like the advent of technicolour; I can now view the world in a new way, and I don't think that's an overstatement.

Out goes the plannery wank that many would use to sell a strategy; I believe Roland Barthes has a lot to answer for when it comes to the advertising community - I don't think I can tolerate sitting through a creative review where signs, symbols and bastardly signification comes up (yes, I had to endure a year of that in first year English - bet you think you dodged a bullet there, eh?).

No, it's slowly being condensed into stories. Stories which will entertain, sell and be relevant (though don't get me wrong - the latter will be bloody difficult to pull off - and that's where a good agency/client relationship comes in).

Instead of being constrained by a 30 second spot, new world agencies can create the narrative. Stimulating, relevant stories which both drive up commerce and allow agencies to flex that creative muscle. And, speaking as a planner, it means that my brand ideas can truly be a strategy, rather than some stop gap solution which is discarded at the same time as the agency is dispensed with.

No, there isn't any smoke without fire. The old model is under threat. But I sincerely hope that the new one will retain the most important elements of the old - creating big brand ideas - with a much more dynamic and stimulating approach. And that we lose this 'seeing ads as advertising people' belief - you are a person. So is your audience. So treat them like that; if you don't, it looks like you'll be out of a job.

Little Help?

Picture comes via Gioblu. Usual rules apply.

Hello all.

I don't usually do shout outs, but I really think you should all go to Rob Campbell's blog (Rob@Cynic) and help out with some suggestions about his project, 'Human2'.

It concerns improving the plight of homeless people. I think some of the ideas generated are pretty good thus far, but we could surely do with some more debate.

So please, you bright folk who read this (all of you, surely) but haven't contributed to the thread, go there and have a comment; it'd be a great help.

Cheers.

Smile Like You Mean It (Thoughts on Passion)

Above: England's finest celebrating a goal. Picture via hout7.

This has been sparked by a few conversations I've been having; it's a response of sorts, so bear with me.

As I'm sure I've mentioned on this blog before, I talk a lot. Sometimes, this can be misinterpreted as being a wee bit arrogant, or not listening properly. I wish I could stop talking so much, but it's bloody difficult (and I hope I'm neither arrogant nor a bad listener).

Anyway, I was thinking about this a bit more - why do I talk so much? Why do some people clam up in conversations?

When it comes to the latter, I don't think it's down to a lack of passion, that's for certain - I think it's a comfort issue; how willing you are to open yourself up to people you don't know very well/are intimidated by, for example. Pretty obvious stuff.

But why should I talk so much? Surely a core planning trait is the ability to be stoic and quiet, only interjecting when it's absolutely necessary? Well....I've certainly met planners like that, and that's no bad thing - I wish I possessed as much clarity and brevity as they do, but I think (hope) it'll come in time.

What gives me hope about my chatty nature are bloggers (I'm thinking of a few) that I know like to express an opinion or two. Not the archetypal planning person (certainly not what the IPA would have you believe), if you look below:



Yes, it makes me scratch my head as well. I have a social life, honestly...and I'm not sure I have a 'planet sized brain' either.

The stereotype is frankly bollocks; misappropriating the myth of the planner, which is no more right than propagating the slicker than owl shit suit or the grumpy genius creative. Just wrongheaded.

Anyway, back to the point I was making. Such character assessments are wrong. But what should be important (something I look for in people I meet) is being passionate about what you like, whether it's being an ad bod like myself, or a toy maker or whatever. I enjoy working in advertising, so I write about it. If you are quiet but are desperately passionate about kite-flying or taxidermy, that's also great.

Enjoying your job and being passionate about it, whether being quiet or talkative, is crucial for me. It's why I didn't pursue Law as a career.

Whether or not I talk too much, or fit into a planner stereotype just doesn't matter. Now, whether I care about the work I undertake and what I'm doing does.

A friend of mine once said that 'you can't just be passionate anymore' when speaking about how to get into advertising, and he's right. But it still remains the most important trait. Passion for the business and for effective work should be at the forefront of everyone in the agency. Not just because you want associated fame from getting an ad on the telly (though that is nice).

It's funny, doing a little bit of research into what I like, and what drives me reveals it even more startlingly. My favourite music artists are all ballsy, passionate people who want to create though provoking tunes, whether they be big beats or acoustic, sensitive ballads.

The same is true for writers; I admire John Milton and George Orwell above all because they care, and are deeply, deeply passionate about what they write, and it really resonates with me.

It must be stressed that being passionate without reason is definitely barking up the wrong tree (akin to talking too much without a real point). But the two shouldn't be mutually exclusive in the first place - if you are passionate about something, you'll probably know a lot about it, or want to learn, which is the most important thing.

And yes - passion can overspill into what appears to be arrogance or anger. But I don't think it's either - it's wanting to do a good job, wanting to make the work the best it can be and above all, caring about things.

NB: Though I'm no Man United fan (God no), I love watching Wayne Rooney play football. Someone who cares so much and wants to win, coupled with that amount of skill, is a joy to watch. I only wish Mamady Sidibe was like that.

I'm also planning to do another Cucumber Sandwiches Podcast, this time featuring some of my favourite passionate tunes.

Shh....it's a secret...

An arty shh, courtesy of Novembre85.

A recent report on the BBC has been jumped upon by many bloggers as evidence that there is in fact a 'class divide' between different social networking sites.

Well, considering there was another piece of research telling us that your average social networking person is a member of about four social networking sites, you could easily doubt the validity of the former. As I've stated before, I think the former is wrong-headed; it's not class based, it's design/intention based. And as for the other piece of research, it doesn't surprise me.

Simply put, people don't appear to have a great deal of loyalty.

But I would like to take issue with the conclusion of the latter. I'm a member of...oooh, quite a few social networking sites. But Facebook is the one I turn to most often (read: 90% of the time). And, given the recent widget explosion, it seems I'll be there for a while longer.

Though lots of people are very concerned that the widget explosion could lead to a mass commercialisation of the site, turning the clean and pleasant design into an ad riddled MySpace. Which, frankly, I don't think anyone wants to see (unless it's for something I actually want).

And these things lead me to think about another potential problem, highlighted by Mike Butcher, one of the speakers at the PSFK Conference I went to (yes, I will write the rest up, prompted by my reclaimed Moleskine).

Namely, what happens when some of these social networks become more closed circles, as he predicts they will?

I mean, will we have a Skull and Bones social network? Doubt it, to be honest (the fear it'd be hacked would put paid to that).

People will begin to get fed up with having so many friends, with their worlds converging (personally, I have 249 friends on Facebook at the moment, and I'm purposefully not putting my blog's URL up there - I'm trying to keep my home friends and my ad friends separate for at least a little while longer), and will begin to break away. I'm not sure whether I will...probably not, but who knows?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating lots of mini networks, where each one serves a purpose. No, I think that's equally as short sighted. But I am interested to note just where Facebook goes from here. I mean, it has countless widgets, unlimited groups and so forth. Yes, there are privacy settings, but the amount of people not using them is unbelievable. Most people, in my limited experience, don't self-regulate to that extent - and most of the time, it's unbelievably refreshing to see.

The title of the post references secrets - and with good reason; I do worry a bit, personally, about things I've said online (don't we all?), especially considering that they can be stored for all eternity - and I do wish there was a more secretive way of social networking (not blogging per se, but Facebook - do I really want potential employers to see me after a few beverages/in dubious fancy dress?). Of course, this matters less in a career like advertising, where a bit of character is encouraged. But imagine what it must be like for someone's political career/law career say.

The one saving grace is that the whole world is learning this, and growing up at the same time. People are beginning to realise that being an online presence, as it is, isn't all its cracked up to be, and you have to self-moderate. That said, if the worst it's doing is teaching a bit of common sense, it can't be that bad.

Again, I return to the darker element (and I wish I could have gone to this) of the internet. If this rise in social media leads to more private social sets online, what's to stop people destroying, say, other people's lives/careers with a well-placed lie? After all, if we believe James G Watt, "A lie can run around the world before the truth can get its boots on".

Say, in this hypothetical situation, that a lie is told. The person who the allegation is about is say, on holiday. Days pass. People begin to wonder/believe what's been told, and the time away helps them decide. Simply put, people have to become their own PR entities, which shouldn't be the way it is.

So perhaps it is a good thing that we live in such social networked, open times. I'd rather have a single forum where I 'am' online, in addition to my blog. It'd probably save a helluva lot of problems in the long run, regardless of my worlds overlapping.

NB: Before you ask, yes, I have been looking at Orwell and Huxley's pages on Wikipedia, hence the Orwellian thinking in this post.

Why good branding is like Marmite..

A pyramid of filth. Via chiri_dr.

Boy, I'm really pushing this whole 'advertising analogy' thing this week. Don't quite know why, but there we are.

From bands to Marmite in one post to another. No, I've not been drinking lead paint (though it is delicious - but deadly).

You see, I hate Marmite. Absolutely despise it. I'm not a fussy eater, but Marmite is Beezlebub's own fecal matter. Not pleasant for anyone concerned. (Nor is Parmesan cheese, but that's a post for another day).

But so many people love the stuff. And it occurred to me - at least I have some reaction to the brand. And the fact it's so violent (in my case) against it, it becomes a conversation with others. Far better to be talked about than not at all. Everyone has some stance.

So compare that with the last parade of ads you saw in your recent TV watching time. Remember any of them? And no, no answering the question like an 'ad person' (who'd typically say 'yes, CHI's work is great....[or] I like what Fallon have done with X').

I sincerely doubt people recall that many, much less having a strong opinion like I/others have about Marmite.

Now let's bring in another figure...

Everyone who works in advertising has an opinion about this gentleman. Via Analogue Logic.

Yes, Mr Barry Scott of Cillit Bang.

If you've not seen the delights of his advertising, don't worry! It's below:



It's not my favourite ad, put it that way. But boy, is it effective (warning, opens a pdf). Reckitt Benckiser are laughing all the way to the bank.

And people have been playing with the brand to a great degree. It's not always popular, has been found out a few times, and there have been some underhand marketing exploits, as the 'popular' link explains.

Yes, it's massively derided. But I know about it, and I'm willing to bet 75% of the people who read my little missive today will know about it.

Basically, the end of this little analogy is just to say - agencies (be you digital, ATL or integrated) make your ads stand out and get people talking. Cutting through the dross is half the battle. I'm not sure if everyone liked the Tango ads at the time, but damn, weren't they spectacular in terms of sales/word of mouth. And so are the Cillit Bang ads, I have to say.

And finally - never buy Marmite. People don't like you when you do.

Formed a band, We Formed a Band.. Look at us..

The Stone Roses/Primal Scream bassist Mani.

Well, it's time for what one of my tutors would call an 'inappropriate analogy'. To hell with it, they didn't have any Art Brut lyrics to use when writing titles.

Yes, I'm drinking at the well of pretension today. And it tastes good.

The subject of this piece of overstretched thinking is advertising (and its denizens) as a band. This has already been brought up by the erstwhile Mr Davies, but I thought I'd give it my own thoughts. Especially after going to a few gigs last week.

Planners then. We're quite clearly the bassists of the whole operation. Making sure the work hums along, is in rhythm with what the client and the audience want. Bands/Advertising can work without us (Sony 'Balls' is clearly an extended guitar solo of creativity), and we must never forget that. But with us, we can make the work groove along.

Also, perhaps most importantly - when we do our job, you barely notice that we are there. The work works, it's on the right brief, and products/albums get shifted. We're the creative midwives of the whole operation (thanks to Craig M for that description), who are often in the background. Plus - bass solos rarely work (unless you are Andy Rourke or Mani Mountfield).

Production/Creative Services...let's think about them. I'd say they are the drummers in our advertising band. Driving the work through with their thumping beats. Without these guys, the world falls apart.

And their ability to make even the most outlandish request fly (through their extended drum soloes on the phone to suppliers and others) means they are essential. God, we need these people. Often the most understated/lovely people in the advertising band.

The ad band in force. I'm quite happy to be Rourke. Listen to the Queen is Dead for proof of that.

Now, these next two are up for debate (depending on what side of the fence you sit). But this is how I'd appraise them:

Account Handlers are the vocalists in our band. Without their melodious vocal stylings to the client, even the most flamboyant piece of guitar work/creative execution wouldn't get into the hearts and minds of the record buying public.

I'm not sure if the lyrics would sound the same if not for these guys. It's got to be well projected to convince a weary record buying public, who are used to the NME trumpeting them as the next big thing.

Finally, Creatives. These guys are the lead guitarists and the lyricists of our little outfit. They make the sonic landscapes that everything comes from. Sometimes at odds with the way the vocalist sings their lyrics, they are nonetheless vital to providing the hooks in the band.

Sometimes they can get overly flamboyant, and are pulled back by the rest of the band, but when they collaborate, the music has a good beat, and you can dance to it.

(NB: Yes, I know The Smiths don't quite fit into the ad band as Morrissey wrote the lyrics, but ah well).

If I could plot a week of gigs...

Billy Corgan and chums giving it their all..

Well, this week's been very cool, and largely in a selfish 'spending lots of money on live music' way.

Put it this way; if you'd had said that in a week I'd have been able to see The Smashing Pumpkins and Grinderman, I'd have sniggered at you. Two of my favourite bands, and definitely my two favourite front men, Billy Corgan and Nick Cave.

Tuesday then - got a little email from someone who read my desperate plea on Last.fm for tickets, and flogs me one. I was a bit sad that my housemate couldn't come along, but he told me to go and have a good time.

So, after writing a presentation, away I went to Shepherd's Bush on my own. It was the only gig I've been to where touts weren't selling tickets, but buying them instead...such was the level of the demand. I met up with a load of cool Pumpkins fans (who tended to be Scandinavian or Australian, oddly) and got this close to the door, when I saw the 3 people in front of me kicked out of line as they had fake tickets.


To say I was a little worried would have been putting it mildly. Happily, I got in.

It was the first time I'd seen a gig at Shepherd's Bush, and I was very impressed. The ticket was for standing in the (tiny) area in front of the stage. Yes, I had a damned amazing view. I make bugger all apologies for being the big person at the gig (I'm 6'3"), but I tried to let the little people go in front of me. I did, though, take some photos, breaking Lauren's gig rules by taking a few photos, which can be found on my flickr...

And what of the gig itself? Well, it was fucking brilliant. Best gig I've ever seen, by a long long way.

I've heard people say Corgan is detached and remote, but he wasn't tonight, bantering with the crowd nicely (especially during the second encore) and generally being a rock legend. His singing's improved, which was great.Jimmy Chamberlin is the best drummer I've ever seen in the flesh as well. The new folk were good too, adding more weight to the argument that the Pumpkins are Corgan and Chamberlin.

Thirty Three, Muzzle, Hummer (acoustic, brilliant) and Cherub Rock were my favourites. I got throughly crushed at the front, but it was fantastic.

Oh, and they played for 3 hours. On at 8, off at 11. Two encores, which is pretty special. Most of the set list can be found below (it's a wee bit blurry/dark, but that's a camera phone for you). Add to that Cherub Rock and Muzzle (the last tune, and one of my favourites of theirs).


If you want to listen to most of the gig, go here and here, which is a recording of the Paris show (most of the songs they played in London are there). You can also find a better copy of Muzzle from the London show here (not from me). The new single 'Tarantula' is pretty damned brilliant as well - a return to their Siamese Dream heyday.

So, how was I going to top that? Well, Wednesday brought around Grinderman, Nick Cave's new band (the 'mini seeds' gone raaawk).

Above: Nick Cave preaches to the converted. Photo from Obo-Bobolina

Now, unlike the Pumpkins, I've seen Nick Cave do his thing with the Bad Seeds (his main band) before. So my expectations were high, and I had one of my housemates with me (who naturally distrusts live music) who was a big Cave fan.

We ambled to Kentish Town's Forum, pausing to eat the best Fish and Chips I've had since moving to London (they DO get worse the further South you get, I'm sure) before arriving at the venue.

After seeing Seasick Steve as the first support (he was very good - great live), we had the misfortune of watching NYC Synth Punks 'Suicide' play lie. The clue's in the name; they were bloody dreadful. So we decided to hang back until Cave came on.

Well, he duly did, and it was a cracking gig. Shame about the atmosphere. You got the impression that the majority of the audience had come to do a crossword rather than listening to the down and dirty tunes that Cave, Ellis, Casey and Sclavunos had come to serve up.

So we did the only natural thing. Yep, we moved to the front, and the gig improved immeasurably as a result. No Pussy Blues was great live. Cave on the guitar is odd to behold - but it works, though I think he performs best without a guitar; more room to dance and flail around the stage.

Then, in the encore, he did some form of duet with Suicide, which was....odd. But ok.

I still think the Bad Seeds are better than Grinderman, but it was a fun gig. And my musical week was great fun.

Interesting 2007..

Ben from NDG staying anonymous.

Well, I had a bloody good time.

Thanks very very much to Russell for setting it up and generally being a great host.

Everyone was great to listen to, and I loved watching my friends get up and present. One and all, they were brilliant.

I met many, many, many people (the link love would get ridiculous if I linked to everyone I met), and I was throughly gutted I couldn't stay afterwards to enjoy a few beverages.

Here are my pictures. Some are a bit dark/rubbish, but the majority aren't too bad. Suffice to say, I'll never be a professional photographer. You can see everyone else's (much better) photos here.

Why did I leave? I had to plot an event of my own, my 80's houseparty. That went well too.

Back to work now...but I'm a lot more interesting as a result of Saturday.

Mon Père, Ce Héros (Happy Father's Day)

The Humphrey family out for a meal.

Hello.

I've been a bit of a rubbish son. My dad doesn't have a father's day card, and it looks like he won't get it till tomorrow or the next day.

But, inspired by Andrew's posts about heroes and Lauren's recounting of her nana's time in London, I thought I would try and resolve the whole caboodle and write something I've been meaning to write for a while.

Something about my dad.

It took me quite a lot of time when I was younger to realise just who my father was as a person. He'd was the one who spoke authoratively about a wide range of topics when I was younger, was 18 in 1966 (bloody brilliant, eh?), loved Cream, 'knew a little bit about a lot', worked in advertising and was just 'my dad'.

But all of that changed when I was about fourteen. My gangly adolescent self looked admiringly at my father's bag of oddly designed implements and went to a knackered shop with a few mats and yardage markers outside. Inspired by my dad's enthusiasm for the game, I took up golf, started to go to the driving range (being a lefty, I was hitting balls the wrong way round according to him), simply enjoying being there, watching us get much better one day and worse the next, as is the way of all things.

Gradually though, we started to improve. I'll never forget parring a par three my first time out on a proper course, despite shooting a cricket score, or the look in his eyes when we'd both walked off the 18th.

From that point on, my relationship with him irrevocably changed; we weren't just father and son, but we were competitors. Not versus each other, but versus the elements, enjoying the ebb and flow of wandering around green patches of countryside. I think I grew up a little bit from that point. I realised that my dad was more than just 'my dad'. He suffered from imperfections just the same as everyone else.

He could swear like a sailor, really, really wanted to win and do well (he still does, and his eyes still light up when talking about his latest round), and was Mike Humphrey, husband, father of two who suffered from the same worries and concerns as I did, whether it was at home, work or about the future.

Above: Puckrup Hall, our local course.

Fast forward five years, and I'm in the second year of University. I've not touched a club for a little while, and I'm on a driving range - and it's not going well. Left, right, left. Like watching a perfect army march illustrated by hooks and slices through the air.

I think to myself 'This isn't surprising'. And it isn't. I've had a few bad moments on a course, and every time I come back to it, it makes me more cross. I'm too competitive, too used to being a reasonable player to serve up this crap.

Yet I still go back there once and a while.

I'm teaching one of my best friends from University the game. We talk a bit, shoot the breeze, and despite my poor performance, I begin to enjoy myself again. Naturally, I talk about my dad, explain a bit about him and his love of the game and life in general. All sorts.

It's then my friend pipes up. 'You really respect your father, don't you?'

And I have to stop.

I nod and say yes, but the question's been planted.

I think about it a little bit later on in the evening, and rethink what I should have said:

'Of course I do. He's shaped how I am today. My manners, my strange little regional ways of pronouncing things (as dad lived all over the country when he was little), and my BBC English accent. But it's more than that - he's my friend, someone I trust above all. I call him when I'm not sure of what to do professionally. I can really talk to him, and he just gets it.'

Fast forward another four years to today.

I've not played golf for a few years and....oddly, I'm in the same profession as my father. He's an account handler (the MD of a regional agency based in Cheltenham), and I'm an account planner.
And it's not just a case of 'doing what dad does', a cop out because I didn't know what to do.

Far from it. I tested and rejected a lot of career paths before this one, and dad was there, not forcing me to do anything, offering guidance when I considered my potential choices, and allowing me to be my own man. I won't lie, when I finally chose advertising and realised planning was the career for me, he was (and still is) delighted for me.

Which makes me very happy, and bores my mother and sister to tears when we talk ads, which we'll do over a few pints at our local. Golf has much the same effect, but I think that's just a prewired Humphrey male trait; to talk far too much about our interests to the point of boring the rest.

I won't lie to you, my dad is my personal and professional hero. Through him, I learnt the importance of common sense, of trying your very best no matter how good or bad you are at something, and never, ever giving up on something you believe in and really, really want.

Professionally, he loves leading a pitch, presenting good work and making clients happy. Personally, he loves being dad, who both my sister and I can rely on. Such is the measure of the man, I still call him whenever I'm making a career decision.

He shaped my childhood and he still does today, albeit in different ways. I couldn't have wished for a better role model.

So dad - have a happy father's day. I'll try to remember to post my card on time next year.

6 Blogs that make me think...

Yours truly, astounded by all the thought in the room. Thanks to Sammy.

I've been tagged by Daniel at Adstructure, so I thought I'd write some wibblings about 6 blogs which make me think (no, not 5 - I felt like 6). You should definitely read his blog, if you don't already - a real alternate point of view to the majority of British/American plannery ad blogs out there. Special mentions must go to the Paul Feldwick post. Fascinating stuff.

I'm not going to choose the usual suspects, but instead will focus on those blogs I wasn't aware of until fairly recently:

1) Little Green Dot, written by Freya. Well written, interesting...and it makes you think about the future. That's what good writing and thinking should do, in my view. Especially about green issues.

2) Nicola Davies, written by (shock!) Nicola. One of the few examples of an account handler writing in the blog world today. She's ex VCCP Digital, and is just about to begin work at iCameleon.. she has a passion for all things digital - and writes very well.

3) Punk Planning, written by Charlie 'Allegedly bright' Frith. He's the first linked person I know very well in real life (yes, I do sometimes leave my computer). Having more experience of agency madness, and being ex-HHCL should be reason enough to read his blog - that and he's quite possibly the most inquisitive planner I know - and someone who isn't afraid to debate something if he disagrees with it - a trait we could all use.

4) Plan B, written by Peter Kwong. Another 'real life' friend, Peter works at VCCP, and is a lovely chap. His blog has only just begun, so I'm looking forward to reading what he has to say about all and sundry - his blog post about the PSFK Conference is worth a read.

5) Evidence of a Struggle, written by A Writer. Not much is known this elusive chap, save he (I think) used to be a copywriter. He writes beautifully - I found his blog via Adliterate.

6) Adlads, written by Sam Ismail and Anton. I know both of these gentlemen in real life, and they are both great guys. Sam's recent Saatchi exploits have to be worthy of a mention, and Anton's 'no bullshit' approach gets right to the heart of brands and thinking. Like me, they are 'branding the dream' by documenting their adventures in adland.

So aye. You all get this jpg to pass on to 5 (or 6 if you are obtuse like me) blogs you like:

Mellifluous Musical Meanderings..

It's been a while since I've done a mishmash of music, so Oh No Cucumber Sandwiches returns for a sixth outing.. download it here, or scroll down and click on the last little drumming man to play in the blog (probably the best way to do it, as esnips will try and make you sign up - though it's a good service).

As Blogger is a strange beast, my first PSFK write up can be found here (and is out of order...strange) or by scrolling down.

Also, I have a musical request...if anyone, anyone, anyone knows of someone who has spare tickets to the Smashing Pumpkins gig in Shepherd's Bush, could they shoot me an email at the email on the blog or triggerhappy12@hotmail.com?

Much appreciated, as I'd dearly love to go (and so would one of my housemates).

PSFK Conference piccies.. and a minor apology..

Yes, I was there. And rest assured, a two part post is coming. Oh yes.

And, the write up will be a bit of a beast, given my notes.

I'm a bit busy at the moment, so it'll be done soonish..

Until then, have some photos. Never let it be said I'm unattentive to my blog/audience.

PSFK: The First 3 Discussions...

Above: PSFK Conference folk having a bloody good chin wag.

I came, I saw, I blogged... well, I'm about to.

I also took quite a few snaps. View them here.

Before I go any further, I'm also acutely aware that the adlads, NP, The Geek Pirate and Charles Frith will also be writing this up, so if you want a series of alternate views to mine, read each one in turn. Then make up your own mind. Or move the pictures up and down really quickly - it helps simulate being there (or being at sea...either way, you win).

Anyway, I had a damn good time. Thanks to all who helped organise this, and all the speakers. A special mention must go to Piers for setting the whole shebang up. Legend, in a word.

On with the post. I've split this up into two sections, as I took probably about 12 pages of notes (Sam's twitter was fairly accurate about that), and I'm not sure anyone would be able to digest 12 pages worth of my wibblings.

So here's my morning thoughts (as they happened, because consciousness writing is always more fun):

Up at 6.30. Not much of a morning person, so I shamble to the shower in a state of dazed confusion, swear as I stub my toe. Shower, get dressed, eat a hasty banana and listen to loud music on my ipod to wake me up.

Get there. Wow, it's a proper conference and everything. People open doors for me? This doesn't really make sense; usually it's with a faint sense of derision, but not this morning. Oh no.

Free juice and a spot of tea helps towards making me feel civilised. I hob nob with the adlads, Juliana, Dan Symth (from Islington Council), Helen Taylor, Henry Lambert, Charlie and Mark McGuinness. All lovely people, who listen to my warblings and make sympathetic gestures.

Right, it is beginning. Better take m' seat.

Piers is speaking.. playing a few highlights from the NYC PSFK Conference. Looks pretty good. Can only hope today is as good. Piers's point about 'planting seeds of thought', to help change the way you view communications and life in general is great. As is his need to 'bring obsessives together'. It's an interesting way of framing the conference. Doing what you love, and are mildly obssessed by. A good way to think about things, and why I didn't do Law and did English. Do what you enjoy, everyone!

Right then. He's introducing the first chap, Timo Veikkola from Nokia:



Timo's speaking about his job, which is to find out what's going to happen in the next two to three years. There's a great quote of his, which is repeated now for your pleasure: "Nothing compares with the intimacy of one to one communications, but there are barriers of time and distance. My job is to make things natural".

Diversity, and travel, are both key to his job. I'm beginning to wish there was a graduate recruitment thing for 'trend hunter' at the University fairs, but sadly not (and who wants to work for a Law firm or Deloitte anyway?).

Trends, according to Timo, are "Manifestations of values, attitudes and behaviours, of reactions and expressions". Good to know that. Neatly covers off most things, from the Pogs I collected when I was 9, right through to this whole bloggery shenanigan.

So far so good then, but Timo did say something I disagreed with:


Maybe I'm far, far too much of an Orwell and Huxley fan, but I have my doubts as to whether it'll be all as wonderful as he suggests. Still, I'm not a trend watcher/prognosticator, so what do I know? He thinks, interestingly, that we've just come out of a 'Noah's Ark' period in the world, of natural disasters et al, and we're moving towards a knowledge based culture.

Cultural capital is, in Timo's view, being molded together to help make new things. He's referenced the new Morgan Spurlock as an example of this - What Would Jesus Buy? He wraps up on an optimistic note, that all of this will lead to good things in the future. Damn, I'd like his job. Never mind that... he's said some interesting things, and on we go.

Piers is moving onto the next person, Regine Debatty of We Make Money Not Art:



Well, during the slight technical mishap that went from switching from Timo's PC to Regine's Mac, I can say that she's easily the most stylish speaker thus far. Browsing through the PSFK handbook, I also realise that hers is one of those blogs I've heard about but not read about.

I silently curse how rubbish I am at refusing to subscribe to too many blogs. But never mind, this should be something I've never heard before (or maybe some of it, via BoingBoing). Her laptop's sorted now, so on we go.

She's interested in how artists use technology... mmm, this is definitely a field I know nothing about, considering my last proper brush with Science was at GCSE, and I can't really call myself an artist. She's most interested in 'Bio Art' today, and how people are modifying it. She urges us to go to the RCA, and see a show by Tony Dunn, in order to imagine what the future will bring.. and then puts us off our lunches by showing us stem cells being grown on the body. Urgh. But interesting - wonder if people will start a trend and make it cool? It'll then be branded, become more mainstream.. and the cycle begins again.

Victimless leather jacket? Would you like to wear something that's growing, instead of killing a cow to wear one? I'm not sure which has less appeal; I wonder if the growing jacket could feed off you - all kinds of Stephen King b-movie possibilities.. Although, we do eat yoghurt.. chock full of organisms, so I suppose we'll just have to consider it/market it for the future - though I doubt it'll fit me for a good few years yet.

I didn't catch all that... Regine is talking about Memento Mori in Vitro, and how it is a harbinger for the future - for who could have predicted that this would arise two years ago? Not me, that's for certain. Hell, I have to remind myself to get up in the morning sometimes.

Anyway....Regine is now talking about disembodied cuisine. Much as I like munching on all sorts of things (bloody steak being amongst them), I'm not sure I want to eat a still alive steak. Wonder if it'll promote a new form of carnivore behaviour? 'Still alive restaurants'? It'll only be a matter of time before people decide to munch on other guests, I'm telling you.

Regine believes that if we educate the masses, they'd eat it. Not sure myself, but hell - if you train the kids, you can do anything (bloody frightening, but probably true).

And with that, she's done.. some interesting stimuli, and I must check out her blog.

Onto the next set of speakers. Ooh, a panel. This concerns 'The Marketing Gap in Green', chaired by Karen Fraser. It features (from left to right) Tamara Giltsoff, John Grant and Diana Verde Nieto:



Karen frames the debate by imagining a world where consumers can see what companies are up to - how they are trying to become more green. Would be nice, albeit a bit strange. And very much like an Independent worldview (though that's my favourite paper - I'm not sure I see that view ever truly happening).

She then asks a question to the panel: Are agencies and corporations being shaped by consumers?

John steps up to the plate - apparently, there was a study in Marketing Week which stated that of the top 5 polluters, 4 of those are aviators, and John believes (much like Russell, if I recall correctly) that this isn't a brand issue - that the public will shape perceptions of these companies themselves. He notes that, the Body Shop aside, there are very few truly green brands.

Diana holds that it's not about charity - it's about making money, and that marketeers could fall prey to the 'Glass House' supposition. Fair point there; how the hell can you preach green issues and yet be trying to sell stuff? Well, I'd answer that one by claiming that the punters you are trying to reach do know how recycle/do more, and that they'll be flogged things. Just the way of the world - you almost can't help being mildly hypocritical.

Diana then moves on to state that the governmental perspective on the overall green issue has been very confused, and that the green issue has been largely driven by women. She backs up this point by emphasising a choice benefit from the supermarkets - women were the first to go for organic food, and they make the purchasing decisions in the typical household.

Tamara comes back to the paradox of marketing and advertising promoting green issues. Certain brands, she thinks, will be able to get away with this paradox, and others (like car manufacturers and aeroplane companies) will not. Fair point, and nicely put.

John believes you need 3 things for sustainable marketing - being 'green' means 3 things have to happen: 1. Setting new standards - be they labels or publishing a manifesto - for the consumer to follow/judge them on. 2. Collaborating with the customer, not merely selling to them - ie the Ikea Cagoule design (I can't find this one on the web, for some reason). 3. Having new systems in place such as lending goods and libraries, helping us live better - and this notion comes from web 2.0. We are working out where these ideas will come from online - after all, 5.6m people are on Freecycle.

Tamara discusses Zopa, and how web 2.0 can help cut out systems of commerce that have been in place for centuries. I like Zopa, and really wish I'd have talked about it in various client meetings - ah well, it's one for another day. But would I use it? I'm not sure....

John discusses the importance of thinking globally and acting locally - supporting local produce and shopping at the local corner shop, citing farmers markets and the like to support his statement. I'm all for this; I hope the local Londis can spark a revival of sorts (albeit with MUCH better advertising).

Karen wants to know just what it is consumers want, having overheard Tamara's point about packaging, and how you'd rethink convenience over ethics - essentially, people don't like too much packaging, but sometimes it is essential...when do the two converge?

John holds that people just want to be involved. Ask them, and you shall receive your answer. With my cynical hat on, I wonder - do I want to be consulted about a company's packaging decision? No, not really - but I suppose, it'd be nice to be asked. How long before we have floods of questions, and things become the question age...?

John follows that up by contesting that there is very little evidence to suggest that consumers require incentivisation any more. No - in an ideal world, he'd encourage mobile phone companies to halve their fees per month, but have a minimum of a four year contract per person. Nice idea, and one I think will happen. Not sure when, but I find myself nodding and agreeing with it.

Diana pipes up; people want to be rewarded and made to feel happy in her view - to be given an objective and an opportunity to do good. What's wrong is how much people are made aware - Second Life uses a lot of electricity. At this point, I wanted to speak up, and make the point about Second Life avatars and the average Brazillian, but I guess I was wise to keep it quiet...John's chock full of stats, even off the top of his head.

John proposes that green is beyond what people want - it's more needs based in the future. People will need to live in bigger cities. It's paramount that people realise that there will be things that they won't be comfortable with, like the debate about fortnightly bin collections. People will have to deal with issues like waste management in the future.

Karen then asks - what should agencies do? Diana immediately answers, telling them to embrace day to day sustainability, Carbon Footprints and the cost per employee. John holds that there will be niche 'green' agencies, much like digital is now. Diana cuts in, telling people not to treat the green issue as special interest; no-one is an expert at the moment. Too true - you seem to read a different statistic every day.

For Diana, being naive is a big part of learning, and leading to improvement. People think experientially, and we are all learning at the moment. All of the panelists agree, and it's time for Niku's talk...

*This was going to be a 2 part writeup, but sheesh, it's going to be three. Writing up my notes is proving to take a long time (especially in that style). I'll write the next instalment as soon as I can*

Turn and face the strain..ch-ch-changes...

Arnie never had to worry about changing. Not in his acting career.

Having posted countless times about this blog's rapidly changing purpose (from online cv, to conversation, to random musings interspliced with conversation), I thought - in a moment of introspection - it'd be a good idea to ponder just what I'd like to change.

Not just in blogging, but in the wider world as well.

A sort of resolution, if you will. And I'd like to ask you (the lurker/reader/blogger/person who just stumbled across the site looking for photos of Herbie) to have a think, and write about your resolutions, or plans for the future (without getting too personal).

It occurs to me that this is like Paul's Let's See What Happens, but sod it - I feel like making some resolutions:

1) Get a job. Rather obvious this one, and fairly self explanatory. Means I can do the things below. All being well, it'll be sorted sooner rather than later.

2) Start doing some creative writing (not just blogging). As an ex English student, I'd dearly dearly love to be published. It's part of the reason why I get so excited about advertising - being able to see something I've contributed to, but hey - I love to write. So why haven't I done it before? Well, simply because I have a tiny, weeny creative ego. So small in fact, that whenever I write something creatively, I dismiss it a few hours later. Well, this must change. I'll get up earlier if I have to. It'll be slow at first, but I'm sure I'll get into it.

3) Play some more organised sport (particularly 5-a-side). Self explanatory this one. I go to the gym a fair bit now, so the next step is to chase after a ball like a headless chicken again, and prove that I can do more than just juggle a football for a little while. Finding a golf course near my flat may also prove to be a bit difficult, but I'll have a scout out.. I was a 17 handicap before getting frustrated with the game.

4) Learn the guitar/piano. No, I haven't decided which one (probably guitar, but there's something cool about being able to sit down and tinkle the ivories).

5) Get better at listening. Bloody difficult, this one. Especially considering that I love to talk far too much (it's the sound of my own voice, honestly). It's not that I don't like listening, it's more that I love to contribute. Can be a bad thing, and easily misconstrued if I'm not careful. So that's going to be improved. NP is my role model. A great listener.

6) Read more random books (and more classics). This is definitely one for when I have more wonga, but it's following Richard's advice. I'm sure this will help me in my profession, and improve my lateral thinking.

7) Do more cultural things (not just the Tate Modern and gigging). Self explanatory. Need cash for this as well, but it's really about not getting into a routine, or closing your mind to other things - and God knows, we can all be closed minded.

8) Keep up my repositionings of brands. Buying a moleskine really helped me do this, as did working alongside Richard.. but I must keep it up, to have a strategy in my pocket for any random question I may be asked. It also keeps me sharp.

9) Take more photos. It's getting better (and I have stacks of pictures not on my Flickr yet), but I must continue doing what I'm doing.

10) Reconnect with some old friends. In this hurly burly of moving to London, I've not been as good as I should have been with some good mates of mine. This must be rectified.

There are others, but they revolve around buying things - a better sound system/Wii/as many CDs as my bank balance allows - and not really about furthering myself or actually improving my life - well, they might...

We'll see how many of these I manage to do in a few months time. Hopefully the first happens soon.

Thoughts, readers? Do you have any resolutions of your own?

The Web 2.0 Goldfish Bowl?

Picture belongs to Michelle_Bower. Usual rules apply.

In the past week, I've signed up to CoComment (manages my conversations online if I want it to), MediaStarz (pure networking, but hey - I was invited, and it looks like good fun) and finally Wink (to track what I've signed up to and where I am on t'internet).

And it may yet get worse - what about WeFi? OrMyCyberTwin?

Tempted to sign up to both of them, to be honest (especially the latter - closer to realising my dream of auto-blogging).

And I'm just not sure where I stand on the ever increasing types of web 2.0 social networking. I do know that I can't stop signing up to the blighters - if they look vaguely useful. I do worry about the overlap, to some extent.

As ever, in times of need, I decided to visualise it. Trust me, when you click below, you'll realise why it's often a last resort. Needless to say, it explains in my mind how things are constantly changing, overlapping, and why.

It also provides most of the similarities in my mind:

NB: I would suggest clicking on it and viewing it full size.

But yes, this does link to Faris's post a little earlier on continous partial presence (read the comments as well - they are excellent). The rate I'm going, there will be no more Will to spread around. At the moment, my Facebook is largely populated with my old mates, as opposed to my newer advertising/work friends (though the ad community is trying to usurp that - I think half the plannersphere who weren't members of Facebook joined in the last month - and God knows, this article sheds a bit of light).

And with the comparable measures some of these social networking sites are trying to implement (Technorati's WTF being a prime example - it's a wee bit like Digg), it may not be long before they are all linked together, as I've expressed in my Powerpoint slides.

However, is this a bad thing?

Certainly, more of my communities are mixing together than ever before - some ad folk now know some of my other mates, some are doing social stuff with me away from work, and some even go to the pub with me (poor them - even more rubbish talked).

As Amelia outlines on Faris's blog, the mystery is in danger of being lost, and like her, I worry about this. But then, take the this week, and some of the discussions I had:

I met Helen for a very pleasant smoothie at Angel's Breakfast Club, where we had a chat about (amongst other things) how people are different offline, to how they are online. Online, you feel you can get a sense of someone's personality, only to meet them, and to be astounded about how introverted or extroverted they are. OR.. they can be precisely as you think. I like to think I do the latter, but eh, could be wrong.

We concluded that the mystery is still there, a point I (sort of) alluded to in my post about thin-slicing people. You can meet someone on an off day, or in a new situation - and you never truly know how people will react unless you're right there with them; and even then it's not always completely clear.

So that was one discussion - and one airing of views Helen and myself would never have been able to have without the medium of bloggery and our overlapping Web 2.0 ways - I tweeted whether she'd be keen to meet for a coffee, and voila. Helps that I only live 15 minutes from the Breakfast Club and she works in Islington, of course. So there's a point for the t'internet - and of course, we each know different bloggers - and we both got more of an insight into our respective disciplines, which was great. As a result of our conversation, I'm not sure whether I'm introverted or extroverted though. Got to do a test...

Anyway, today I met Lauren (Sheseesred) at the Tate Modern. We took this discussion on in a slightly different way (note - I only have 3 actual lucid conversation topics - the rest are about taxidermy, badgers and maypole dancing - not fit for human consumption), by wondering what some of the bloggers we'd not met were like (are you reading this Rob? ). Neither of us could be really sure, but could make educated guesses, as you'd expect - any blog friends of ours who were willing to do a bit of Ipod singing (see below) had to be a bit different and interesting in the flesh:

Above: Proceed with extreme caution...

And yes, no amount of transferable identity could stop us reminiscing about that particular moment of blog history.

But it got better (and this is material for a separate - long discussed - second part post about the Tate). Due to Lauren's background, my uncultured arse got to learn a bit about art.

Yes, more than 'I know what I like'. Actual background on the artists/movements themselves. Hot damn. She also learnt a bit of bollocks about history and the writers of the English Renaissance (I know what you are thinking - good trade on my part). She did parallel me with 'Where's Wally' (on account of my tremendous sartorial choices) though, so I didn't get off that lightly...

And without my 'Goldfish Bowl', if that's what it is, I would never, ever have been able to learn about some these things (short of paying people to tell me - which would never happen).

If it does exist, it's constantly shifting, and, inevitably, there will be crossovers. But to claim that my Facebook profile will always contain the same in jokes, in my limited experience either doesn't matter, or won't happen - social networks are for making friends, and whilst it does promote a bit of 'us and them' (those who participate, those who don't), it allows interesting overlaps (just this week I met someone via Mediastarz who knew a mate of mine from University) and most importantly, new and interesting conversations.

And if the mystery is lost, for the most part.. well.. I don't agree completely. I like to think I'm always changing. You can't ever know someone so well both online and offline that you can predict their every move. People continue to surprise you, and that's great.

What do you think readers - is there a goldfish bowl in web 2.0? And is it a bad thing? And DO I look like Where's Wally?