Remain Relevant in Changing Times

The day my land line phone became irrelevant

Until recently, it hadn't really occurred to me that my phone would become irrelevant. Yet, that's exactly what has happened. April 30 will be the last day my land line interrupts the middle of one of my favorite shows, which, ironically enough, are House and Flip That House (no connection between the two).

After almost 20 years of having the same land line phone number, we have decided to go completely wireless. I honestly have no anxiety about this at all. I can't remember the last time someone called me on my land line who wasn't soliciting for something. My daughters have never had a land line, so calls coming in aren't for them either. It's time to  "let it go." I've come a long way from my childhood days when our family shared a party line with a neighbor.

When I called Bellsouth to let them know of my decision, the first thing  I was told was that I would now be  dealing with "The new AT&T" (as if that made a difference). When I told Chris that I had decided I no longer needed a land line, he suggested I keep the line at a new reduced rate of  about $25 a month, less than half what I had been paying. I explained that the same $25 bucks could buy me an enormous amount of additional, flexible cell service. He didn't even try to argue with me. Maybe he realized the service he was selling was quickly becoming irrelevant to a lot of homeowners like me. Still, wouldn't you think he'd fight harder to keep a 20-year customer?

The day I called to cancel my land line, I also called T-Mobile to switch my daughter's cell service to Verizon because T-Mobile's service is spotty in the college town where Sydney will soon move. The rep did everything he could to prevent the switch. He offered to find out when better coverage would be available and said I could suspend the service until then, thereby keeping the number and not leaving a "service you have enjoyed since January 2004, according to our records." He then suggested switching to a newer phone that had better signal strength and, oh by the way, would be available to me at a discount rate as a reward for being such a good customer. I really liked this guy and actually felt guilty about canceling the service; however, I had already checked into T-Mobile's future coverage plans and knew they didn't include the GCSU area. I was very impressed with the rep's efforts to make T-Mobile continue to be relevant to me. And if T-Mobile had plans to increase coverage in the area soon, I would have stayed with the service.

How about your company? What do you do to ensure you remain relevant to your clients? Don't wait until they've decided they no longer need you before you figure out you still need them.

US Netcom hits new low: proves opportunistic, not relevant

I was so appalled when I saw this news release, I actually began looking for it on several sources just to make sure I didn't misread it or that it was the hoax of a sick mind. Could there really be a company so shameless, so idiotic and so desperate for attention?

US Netcom  appears to be all of those things. Clearly, this company doesn't understand the difference between being relevant and being opportunistic. If the idea is to drive up traffic to their web site so they can put out another release about how they have achieved record number of hits (thus - in their minds - becoming more relevant), let me remind you what HITS stands for: How Idiots Track Success.

I hope all the people who are making history by reporting on the Virginia Tech tragedy online will take note of this company's actions and use their considerable power to give them the attention they richly deserve.

Follow this link to read the full release. Meanwhile, here's the most offensive excerpt:

For $1 per student per year, services such as AllCall Notification could have provided VT with a method of crisis control capable of reaching every student far faster than email. It should have been in place as part of the schools' emergency preparedness plan.

Here are the names of the people who put out this ridiculous release, just in case you want to contact them: Kim Cooke, Mark Hefley, Jeff Worhol, JJ Kelly. I'm sure they'd love to hear from you at 1-800-695-7788 or jeff.warhol@usnetcomcorp.com.

 

We're watching history in the making: Va Tech tragedy changes how stories are covered

If you're still talking about "new media," please stop. There's no such thing any more. It's just media now. Citizen journalists and consumer generated content have never been more relevant than what we have seen in the past two days. The horrible tragedy at Virginia Tech tested the incredible potential - and limits - of the technology that is forever changing the way we communicate with one another, whether across the hall or around the world.

As you know by now, the most compelling video of the police on campus trying to find the gunman came from a camera phone owned by a student (who, btw, was paid by CNN for exclusive footage). So far, it has generated over 2 million views. Hundreds of people have sent what CNN calls i-reports, providing a citizen's eye view of the events as they unfold. Suddenly, the number of "reporters" covering the story has completely changed the way we are able see and absorb the story. We don't have to wait for over-produced, high-priced media personalities to reserve satellite time and set up temporary sets to tell us what they think is going on.

Meanwhile, students learned from other students who was injured, killed and missing by reading Facebook, blogs, MySpace, Wikipedia, and of course through IM's and text messages. Today, there are hundreds of Facebook pages and forums dedicated to mourning the students. In fact, one has drawn more than 28,000 members who share memories, photos, poems and questions. Global online communities are  coming together in a matter of hours. The mainstream media can't keep up. Nor, by the way, can the technology. This horrible event will serve as a blueprint for communications companies to develop even more robust interactive programming.

Over the next several weeks we can expect to see tremendous online coverage of this story as an official investigation gets underway. Every hour new information is revealed as people share their experiences and insight.  We're watching history in the making. News will never be covered the same way again.

Consider this, too: this week marked another new milestone: a majority of teens (55%) now have online profiles.  Watch that continue to grow quickly, especially with the corresponding growth in online coverage of major news.

So, let's drop talk of new media. It's so 12 hours ago.

CBS and Imus: more a misfiring than a simple firing

Imus says he is done apologizing for the remarks that got him fired. Thank God. He was starting to hog ink that could be used to continue to tell us the sordid details of the soap opera about Anna Nichole's baby and speculation over just how bad Sanjaya will be on the next episode of American Idol.

These three stories have one thing in common: they are far more relevant to advertisers than they are to most viewers and listeners. Advertisers care about ratings. They want to know that their products and services are being exposed to the largest audience possible. And these three stories have drawn huge audiences, each for a different reason.

So, I find it just laughable that CBS wants us to believe that they fired Imus because he stepped over the line with his racist remarks. Oh puh-leeze... Imus has offended just about everyone during his 30 year radio career... multiple times, in fact. In many ways, the more offensive he was, the higher his ratings and the happier the advertisers.

This time, though, advertisers ran scared as soon as Jesse and Al got involved and then they really got nervous when the brilliant PR machine at Rutgers went into high gear. Suddenly, they began to worry that this story wouldn't blow over and the strong wind that kept it stirring could well damage sales.  Seems to me they waited just long enough to fire him that it ruined their ability to argue that it wasn't about the advertising dollars, but the offensiveness of his comments.

The lesson to be learned from this is that timing is a key element of relevance. CBS took action too late for most people to believe its argument that the decision was driven by moral outrage rather than the almighty dollar. Right... next thing you know Sanjaya will win American Idol and Fox will try and convince us there was absolutely no manipulation of the process.