Advertising Rising — And We're Watching

There’s nothing like a snarky blog ripping on a ridiculous ad campaign to really get me going. That’s why I love the Internet and everything that spews out of it. The parody, the sarcasm, the lively ads. The Web makes for a digital platform that gives us a chance to examine and tear apart the marketing almighty with a distinct guerrilla edge.

And I must say, ads today rule. I’m sorry, but they really do. Not only are they an increasingly valid form of artistic expression, they also have the power to color and enlighten anyone’s day, and can even raise awareness by providing fantasy fodder for frustrated frumps. They can also severely offend.

Ads range from the dim-witted to the super clever, from the kill-me-know creepy to the LOL funny. And one thing’s for sure: Advertising pushes creative to the limit. After all, how many viral videos are actually quirky, inspired ads that hit a comedic bull’s eye, surprising us from where we least expect it?

A well-executed ad campaign is a tasty treat for media junkies like myself. And if an ad blows chunks, it’s all the better. We can go off on it online. This is because Internet has paved the way for a new kind of ad consumption, helmed by the deconstructive skill of nonplussed advertising watchdogs ready to point out how deliciously absurd the business of selling really is. No doubt, ads have become true pop cultural compasses.

To better wrap your head around what I'm talking about, check out this review of the Snorg tees ads, courtesy of Logged Hours. It’s a riot. I haven’t laughed this hard since running across Adrants’ assessment of the Quiznos’ “not lacking any meat” campaign, featuring a (sexually frustrated?) sappy Asian woman letting out a spastic laugh. Awesome. Both are poignant observations on the ludicrous yet alluring nature of the advertising industry.

So what do you think? Are ads adding something positive to our cultural discourse? And if this is so, can we effectively bite back at advertising execs through online and hold them accountable for crappy creative?

It's Official: There's No Deep Six'ing Hot Gossip

Can't get enough of Britney, even if her latest slip-ups have entered the realm of the cringe-inducing? Has the celebrity game of musical rehab thrown you into a tizzy? Are you losing sleep over the latest blog trysts with the pseudo-news du jour covering B-listers and celeb-politicians? It's all good. You're not morally off-kilter: It's merely your survival instinct turning tricks, apparently.

No amount of hard facts can stem the rising tide of juicy gossip, and there's an evolutionary reason for this. That's right. Check out this article featured in yesterday's Science section of the New York Times, sent my way by one not-at-all-gossip-averse friend in Brooklyn. The article attests that gossip "promotes the 'indirect reciprocity' that made human society responsible." No matter how rational we may be, hearsay and second-hand accounts way in more heavily on our decision-making process than hard truth and figures. Why? Basically, it helps us get along and thrive as a society and whatnot—scientific fact.

Take that, level-headed lobbyists of fair and balanced journalism! Score, media spinsters and PR! Gossip seems to trump facts time and time again, and molds our society with forceful sway.

Duh. It doesn't take a scientist to tell you this. Publicists have known it all along. But now you know for sure: Even the most artless snoozes care for what others have to say, no matter what they say. It's been hard-coded into our DNA and it is essential for our survival as a species.

So don't buy into the hype that totes gossip as an insidious social evil. It does more good than harm, yes sir. No need to read the studies—you can totally take my word for it.

Next time you see a supermarket tabloid screaming sex and scandal on the news rack next to the latest issue of The Economist, make sure to thank the Creator for our impervious instinct at social prying. It's the reason you and I are alive and kicking—even though our collective psyche may end up a little damaged. In the end, the perception of the truth is more important than truth itself. Dare to disagree?

If Digital Doppelgangers Turn

I was watching The Island last night trying to keep myself awake and wondering if I would ever own a clone of my very own. I, unlike others, wouldn’t be riddled with guilt for bringing a doppelganger to life as a medical just-in-case. Then it struck me though: I have clones online haunting the trackless waste of cyberspace—What if they all fuse together into an uberforce of artificial dark cunning and turn on me? After all, I’ve dabbled in personal avatar creation on many an occasion, more so than most I think; and then there's the looming threat that at some point technology might pull a Matrix on us.

Check this out: I have a Second Life, an IMVU avatar, and a Digg profile, plus active profiles in Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, Friendster, Hi5, and aSmallWorld. I'm also a Wikipedia contributor. I’ve spread my online persona so thick that sometimes I feel I’m more real online than off. Is the Internet undercutting my true self? After reading fellow blogger and friend Ryan’s post on her experiences with MyCybertwin.com, I was immediately enthralled by the idea of having a fake me taking care of my most quotidian conversations. I immediately created my own CyberTwin and let him loose on my friends. Although the conversations were totes retarded, it was fun having a virtual Juan chatting away with my online contacts. It was evident it was a fake. But is this a foreboding of something creepier on the horizon?

What’s your take on this? Can digital doppelgangers gain precedence over the real you, to the point where you yourself become irrelevant? If so, can the weather ever lift, or is this exponential? How much can I nurture my own online persona before it Frankensteins into an unstoppable force that feeds on itself? Am I being a paranoid alarmist?

Stay-At-Home Extroverts A Digital Downer

After Thomas Friedman unilaterally announced in the New York Times that the digital generation is way too quiet (labeling it Generation Q), my upchuck reaction was to go online and hate on him on the comment strings of various blog posts and news articles alike. I mean, c’mon! Quiet? If anything, the Internet generation is more opinion-prone and noisy than any other that came before it. Friedman’s assessment did not go down easy with me—after all, I spend most of my time using online as my own personal soapboax, and I know I’m getting heard. I’m proud to say that I’ve skillfully learned the particulars of Internet patois, and I like to think I wield this language with understated professionalism.

After thinking about it some more, however, I’m starting to believe Friedman’s observation was actually teeming with tenacity--more so than I would have ever cared to admit. Here’s my reasoning: The Internet—and on a wider scale, technology in general—used to be the exclusive terrain of techno nerds and Asperger’s geeks. After all, it is easy to tune out through technology when your EQ is on the short end of the bell curve. Now though, being IT literate is a must for anyone who wishes to make meaningful (and lasting) connections with others or for the professional who wants to plump up his or her career. More than this, the Internet has given us the opportunity to work from virtually anywhere—no need to leave our place of residence. Ha! Here’s the rub…

Now, many socially adept professionals have confined themselves to their homes. It is not odd for me to find many a friend on a Friday night at home, hair unwieldy, clothes disheveled, going at it on their laptop computers, desperate to yap it up with anyone who crosses their way. If I was coming home dead tired after a day of hard work, the last thing I would want to do is chat the night away with a smelly roommate in ratty clothes that has spent hours consumed in the Web. A total downer indeed.

Stay-at-home extroverts are a silent byproduct of the digital explosion. I believe high-powered driven types should salvage the wreckage and get office jobs, even if technology allows them to work from home. So what’s your take on this phenomenon? Are we all slowly and silently turning geek?

Your Cell Phone's Rebel Yell

No no, I’m not talking about the ringtone you pulled off some shady site to let everyone else know just how unique or with it you really are. I’m talking about phantom cell phone vibrations! Check out this nutty article featured on Yahoo! News yesterday; it’s right up my alley, and tailor-made for all you crazy cell-phone-and-BlackBerry-toting professionals. It’s creepy, it’s kooky, and it’s a sign o' the times. And I kind of like it!

Is your love affair with your phone causing you ringxiety? It seems a lot of us are sufferers. Here’s one guy quoted in the article who I know a lot of you can totally identify with:

“Jake Ward… claims to ‘pre-feel’ a new message or call. ‘I'll feel it, look at it. It's not vibrating. Then it starts vibrating,’ he said. ‘I am one with my BlackBerry.’”

I like to think I am also one with my tech tools. My laptop’s my favorite friend of them all. I’ve tapped into that otherworldly force much maligned by hokey teen scream movies such as Pulse; but rather than haunt me, this techno-force empowers me.

The iPhone is definitely my next purchase--once the technology becomes available in Costa Rica, that is. I too, want socially sanctioned carte blanche to surf the Web wherever I might be, in detriment of face-to-face interactions. If only I could grow an iPhone off my hip. So what do you think? Are you also a sufferer of “fauxcellarm”?

Church of Pop Becomes Her

I decided to take a cue from copyranter today and partake in random image searches on Google for my next collaborative online project, “Church of Pop” (there’s already a site up online called “The Church of Pop,” which is light years behind from what Church of Pop will be all about--and out of spite, I refuse to link to it). Anyway, my search for “church pop” yielded the above image, among others, on the first SERP.

The art caught my eye; I find it both telling and alluring, aesthetically refined yet eerily empty. So I have decided to post it here on my blog. Think of it as your first look-see at what Church of Pop can offer on-the-go online readers. A sneak peak at a soon-to-be website that will be slathered with pop culture iconography and will swivel with the centrifugal force of instant literary and philosophical allusions. Fast-food philosophy at its best, no doubt.

Sounds heady? Kludgy even? It won’t be! I promise. It’s a fun exercise in postmodern collective self-expression (we're still ironing out a few kinks). Plus, it will include a myriad of lofty analyses from recent pop music hits, dating all the way back to the 70’s. “Um…What?” you may ask. Just wait and see.

So... do you have some ideas to make sure Church of Pop makes waves online? Send them my way!

Infoterrorism Unhinged — And Redefined

Terrorism on the Web is by no means spectacular, especially if you are one of those assembly-line jihadist jerks jonesing for media attention and hoping to garner some of that sought-after shock and awe for your own screwy cause. After all, it’s not as cinematic as blowing up buildings, and the experience will be devoid of rattled, helpless infidels running for their lives all bloodied and dazed. No gore, no good.

It’s no secret, however, that terrorists are adept at using information technology to power up their efforts to spread their injurious ideology and recruit many an ignorant Mr. chip-on-his-shoulder as zealously as possible. But information terrorism seems to be, ostensibly, a far more sophisticated concept than that which any religiously-fueled and violently-punctuated movement could ever leverage with skill. Check out this definition of infoterrorism, courtesy of Infoterror.com:

"Infoterrorism is the art of disrupting the media control of your enemies by pointing out paradox… it is transacted mainly through writing."

Democratic undertones, literary innuendo, resilience... Okay... I’m down with that, sure. In fact, It sounds like something I would be happy to sink my teeth into. I wonder if I’ve already dabbled in some form of information terrorism, as I feel I’ve used my writing to deconstruct and claw at societal assumptions and media fortresses myself, from this very blog.

To be honest, I thought information terrorism meant cyber-attacks on corporate IT systems—not so, according to some online thinkers. Which is all the better: At times, running counterculture against established media seems like my cup ‘o tea. But the question remains, am I bold (or crazy) enough to call myself an infoterrorist? Are you?