Scott Monty

With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility

<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NKMRINEIxN0/WuHhTEX1VXI/AAAAAAAA76c/Gb-aPib5igAY4g3z9mkqYIyiAQ5mhjCtQCLcBGAs/s1600/Thomas%2BCole%2B-%2BThe_Course_of_Empire%2B3%2B-%2BThe%2BConsummation.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="814" data-original-width="1200" height="434" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-NKMRINEIxN0/WuHhTEX1VXI/AAAAAAAA76c/Gb-aPib5igAY4g3z9mkqYIyiAQ5mhjCtQCLcBGAs/s640/Thomas%2BCole%2B-%2BThe_Course_of_Empire%2B3%2B-%2BThe%2BConsummation.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i style="text-align: left;">Image credit: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Course_of_Empire_(paintings)#/media/File:Cole_Thomas_The_Consummation_The_Course_of_the_Empire_1836.jpg">The Course of Empire - The Consummation of the Empire</a> by Thomas Cole (public domain)</i><br style="text-align: left;" /></td></tr></tbody></table><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
You've probably heard the phrase "<b>with great power comes great responsibility</b>." Its origins are uncertain, as it's been co-opted by Winston Churchill, Teddy Roosevelt and even Stan Lee in the first Spider-Man comic. The earliest recorded version is actually from a set of decrees set forth at the French National Convention in 1793: "great responsibility follows inseparably from great power." And that too is preceded by the Biblical verse Luke 12:48:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked."</blockquote>
And so we turn our attention to Mark Zuckerberg. His seed of an idea in his Harvard dorm room has turned into a company that touches billions of people around the world in its utopian desire to make the world a more connected place. Facebook has been given and entrusted a great deal – personal data of nearly one-third of the world's population. <br />
<br />
The question is: have we demanded enough of them?<br />
<br />
As we've seen and read, Zuckerberg does seem to be contrite and admits errors of judgment. There's no question that Facebook is run as an idealistic and optimistic company, and while it portrays itself as a benefactor to the race, it hasn't played by the rules. Time and again, Facebook has been warned about privacy violations and playing fast and loose with features. From its surprise release of the News Feed in 2006 to the ill-fated Beacon advertising system to consensual data sharing and many more examples, <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/why-zuckerberg-15-year-apology-tour-hasnt-fixed-facebook/" target="_blank">Facebook has lived</a> by <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/40547045/a-brief-history-of-mark-zuckerberg-apologizing-or-not-apologizing-for-stuff" target="_blank">apology</a>.<br />
<br />
See, it 's not like Facebook hasn't known what it's been doing. With Cambridge Analytica, Facebook knew what happened in 2015, but it's only in recent weeks – thanks to the press – that we've become aware of it. In <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/05/599770568/facebooks-sheryl-sandberg-on-data-privacy-fail-we-were-way-too-idealistic">an interview with NPR</a>, Facebook's COO Sheryl Sandberg said that the company is now taking aggressive action and making privacy policy easier to understand – about something that has been at the core of their business strategy from the beginning. She said Facebook was "way too idealistic," but it's not "way too idealistic" when <a href="https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/facebook-alarm-bells-have-been-ringing-years/">Facebook had been given warning signs that they choose to ignore</a>. That's willful neglect.<br />
<br />
We can imagine the difficulty in undoing so much that's been done in the last decade by Facebook. With so many users, it must be a daunting task. It's also daunting to think that personal privacy is being treated so lightly by someone with so much power. For a contrast in responsibility, look no further than Apple CEO Tim Cook, who stated that "<a href="https://www.recode.net/2018/4/6/watch-apple-ceo-tim-cook-msnbc">privacy is a human right</a>."<br />
<br />
The control of data will be the major conversation among brands and tech companies in the foreseeable future. From data breaches and hacks to privacy policies, consumers will want to know where their data is going. And as an entity that has a relationship with your customers, you'll want to have as much control over that data as possible, as that's what will lead to better customer experiences and peace of mind for your customers.<br />
<br />
Much will be demanded; much more will be asked.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div><br /></div>

With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility

Image credit: The Course of Empire - The Consummation of the Empire by Thomas Cole (public domain) You've probably heard the phrase...

Oh the Humanity

<div class="post-body entry-content post-entry-contentnbt" id="post-body-8538571596199293783" itemprop="articleBody" style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div class="separator" style="border: none; clear: both; font-family: "PT Serif", Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ArkfYuC3UnY/WsHvK7N5tTI/AAAAAAAA7aQ/nWyui7O7H3AsJtK-PXjUGmFgGQdV8WjpQCLcBGAs/s1600/Thomas%2BCole%2B-%2BThe_Course_of_Empire%2B2%2B-%2BThe_Arcadian_or_Pastoral_State_1836.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="border: none; color: #2775ad; font-weight: bold; margin: 0px 1em; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img border="0" data-original-height="748" data-original-width="1200" height="398" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ArkfYuC3UnY/WsHvK7N5tTI/AAAAAAAA7aQ/nWyui7O7H3AsJtK-PXjUGmFgGQdV8WjpQCLcBGAs/s640/Thomas%2BCole%2B-%2BThe_Course_of_Empire%2B2%2B-%2BThe_Arcadian_or_Pastoral_State_1836.jpg" style="border: none; height: auto; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanmac/growth-at-any-cost-top-facebook-executive-defended-data?utm_term=.nelmVm7PdN#.vf7393Ne26">A controversial memo</a> written by Facebook executive Andrew Bosworth memo – admittedly written to provoke a response – revealed the extent to which Facebook’s leadership understood the social risks inherent in the platform.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"We connect people. Period. That’s why all the work we do in growth is justified."</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="post-body entry-content post-entry-contentnbt" id="post-body-8538571596199293783" itemprop="articleBody" style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
But here's the thing: humans weren't meant to be connected on a global scale. The entire history of humanity – recorded and unrecorded – reflects that. Tribes, clans, and countries have warred for years. The disparity between cultures, morals, ideals, priorities and more have consistently put differing people at odds with one another. Social media didn't create that. In fact, it magnified it.<br />
<br />
In the <i>New York Times</i>, Kevin Roose wrote, "<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/28/technology/social-media-privacy.html">there's something is wrong with social media</a>," as he tried to make a case that the platforms are at fault, but that's not really the case. There's something wrong with <b>humans</b>.<br />
<br />
In the 1990s, British anthropologist Robin Dunbar introduced a theory that there is a cognitive limit to the number of people with whom we can maintain stable social relationships. That number – <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number">Dunbar's number</a> – is widely accepted to be 150. Stable social relationships.<br />
<br />
Think about that for a moment. How many contacts to you have on Facebook? On Twitter? On LinkedIn? In your company? Technology has pushed us past the capacity to effectively maintain relationships. And what we see online, amid endless commenting, replying, and the rest is society run amok: trolls, abuse, anger, and other negative displays of emotion that are tied to the relative anonymity and seemingly dehumanization that a social account can provide.<br />
<br />
Is it any wonder then that <a href="https://www.emarketer.com/content/is-gen-z-growing-tired-of-constant-social-connectivity">young adults are growing tired of constant social connectivity</a>? This is why private messaging and smaller group interaction online are taking hold. It's also why people respond well to hand-written notes, personalization, and local experiences. It's <b>human nature</b> to want to feel like you matter and that you stand out from the crowd – that you're more than a number or statistic.<br />
<br />
Yes, people fundamentally want to be connected. But they don't want to be connected with 2 billion other people. Or even 800 people. They want connections that matter, on a scale that matters.<br />
<br />
And it's <a href="http://braintrust.partners/the-crisis-at-facebook-is-not-about-data-its-about-leadership/">incumbent upon platform providers</a> to take that into account.</div>
<div class="post-body entry-content post-entry-contentnbt" id="post-body-8538571596199293783" itemprop="articleBody" style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<div class="post-body entry-content post-entry-contentnbt" id="post-body-8538571596199293783" itemprop="articleBody" style="border: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
<i>Image credit: <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=182982">The Course of Empire - The Arcadian or Pastoral State</a> by Thomas Cole (public domain)</i>

Oh the Humanity

A controversial memo written by Facebook executive Andrew Bosworth memo – admittedly written to provoke a response – revealed the exten...

In the Shift from Channel to Customer, Brands May Be Hamstrung

<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-G9gSqR4DrUE/Ww7_ZqRzGKI/AAAAAAAA8lY/cFfF2OWL-ZkPyuAxakXg_0Hog68bLyZdgCLcBGAs/s1600/Thomas%2BCole%2B-%2BThe_Course_of_Empire%2B1%2B-%2BThe_Savage_State_1836.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="995" data-original-width="1600" height="398" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-G9gSqR4DrUE/Ww7_ZqRzGKI/AAAAAAAA8lY/cFfF2OWL-ZkPyuAxakXg_0Hog68bLyZdgCLcBGAs/s640/Thomas%2BCole%2B-%2BThe_Course_of_Empire%2B1%2B-%2BThe_Savage_State_1836.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
We recently began a commentary with <a href="https://www.scottmonty.com/2018/05/when-unstoppable-force-meets-immovable.html" target="_blank">a focus on Big Tech</a> – how Facebook and Google hold a duopoly in digital advertising – and ended with a call for brands to own their data. Given that the piece mostly focused on the former, we'd like to explore the latter a bit more.<br />
<br />
The IAB report <a href="https://www.iab.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/The-Direct-Brand-Economy-Master-Deck-v17.pdf" target="_blank">The Rise of the 21st Century Brand Economy</a> contains a few nuggets worth considering. Namely:<br />
<ol>
<li>As the retail apocalypse continues, there are permanent changes in industry supply chains that are shifting the center of growth in the U.S. consumer economy from brick-and-mortar locations to digital outlets.</li>
<li>Economic benefits are accruing to firms that create value by tapping into low-barrier-to-entry, capital-flexible, leased or rented supply chains. These include thousands of small firms in all major consumer-facing categories that sell their own branded goods entirely or primarily through their owned-and-operated digital channels.</li>
<li>The single-point retail fulfillment experience has permanently changed to a variable experience, which in turn transforms all value-creation and extraction activities before, during, and after the sale.</li>
<li>All retail sales growth is shifting from brick-and-mortar stores to digital, data-enriched channels.</li>
<li>First-party data relationships are important not for their marketing value independent of other functions, but because they fuel all significant functions of the enterprise, including product development, customer value analysis, and pricing.</li>
<li>An arms race for first-party data is influencing strategy, investment, and marketing strategies among major incumbent brands across all categories.</li>
</ol>
<div>
That's quite a bit to digest. Let's dwell on it for a bit.<br />
<br />
On one end of the spectrum, we've got Amazon and Walmart fighting for supremacy as the One Distributor to Rule Them all. And as we've previously seen, all it takes is a head fake by Amazon and an entire industry's market is in upheaval.<br />
<br />
But on the other end, we've got <a href="https://www.inc.com/magazine/201805/tom-foster/direct-consumer-brands-middleman-warby-parker.html" target="_blank">hundreds or thousands of brands that are competing in the DTC market</a>, effectively cutting out distributors and retailers and handling the relationships themselves. Brands have been conditioned to serve the <b><i>channel</i></b>, not the <b><i>customer</i></b>, so it's not surprising that they're <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimberlywhitler/2018/04/26/why-unilever-general-mills-and-procter-and-gamble-arent-good-at-marketing-in-the-modern-economy/#46a9734516a4" target="_blank">woefully underprepared to compete</a> with the likes of Warby Parker, Quip, Casper, Allbirds, Dollar Shave Club, and more.<br />
<br />
All of those companies have made it <b>frictionless </b>for customers to use their products, with deliveries and returns being handled directly by the brand. Some have even gone as far as to build in a subscription model to make it even easier to acquire the products. It's really not that different from what we're seeing in the media world, with cord-cutters getting what they want from a variety of networks and subscription services that have made an end-run around the traditional cable and satellite companies.<br />
<br />
All of the above means that traditional an upstart brands need to be serious about personalized experiences. Knowing your customer and giving them what they need (even if they don't know they want it) is the new expectation. And rather than having 10 audience personas to develop and market to, there will be thousands or more, each different from the next.<br />
<br />
But here's a fear amid heading down this path: personalization may eventually lead to a decline in shared consciousness. Think about it: with <a href="http://www.scottmonty.com/2015/11/the-danger-of-too-many-choices.html" target="_blank">a nearly infinite number of choices</a>, it means that we'll have less in common with each other than when there were limited choices. Johnny Carson was universally known and seen by tens of millions of viewers because that was <i>the</i> show to watch at 11:30 pm (back when there were few channels); now every late-night show host gets a couple of million. Saturday morning cartoons were a thing of our childhood; now our kids are watching the thousands of YouTube channels and influencers available to them.<br />
<br />
In 1987, E.D. Hirsch wrote <i>Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know</i> in which he noted:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"[C]ultural literacy—the grasp of background information that writers and speakers assume their readers and listeners already have—is the hidden key to effective education in America."</blockquote>
<br />
And here we stand, on the edge of a society that is placing more emphasis on catering to the individual. That's the kind of cultural literacy that brands could do with right about now.<br />
<br />
<br />
<i>Image credit: <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cole_Thomas_The_Course_of_Empire_The_Savage_State_1836.jpg#/media/File:Cole_Thomas_The_Course_of_Empire_The_Savage_State_1836.jpg">The Course of the Empire - Savage State</a> by Thomas Cole (public domain)</i></div>
<div>
<i><br /></i></div>

In the Shift from Channel to Customer, Brands May Be Hamstrung

We recently began a commentary with a focus on Big Tech – how Facebook and Google hold a duopoly in digital advertising – and ended w...

When an Unstoppable Force Meets an Immovable Object

<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qv-trWPcKXc/Wuh5i7596WI/AAAAAAAA7_0/q2dp4tC9ry0XWxoOXaED6llHjf1BiePzQCLcBGAs/s1600/Joseph%2BMallord%2BWilliam%2BTurner%2B-%2BBell%2BRock%2BLighthouse%2B-%2BGoogle_Art_Project.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="792" data-original-width="1200" height="422" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qv-trWPcKXc/Wuh5i7596WI/AAAAAAAA7_0/q2dp4tC9ry0XWxoOXaED6llHjf1BiePzQCLcBGAs/s640/Joseph%2BMallord%2BWilliam%2BTurner%2B-%2BBell%2BRock%2BLighthouse%2B-%2BGoogle_Art_Project.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Amid all of the recent uproar of data privacy issues among a number of companies, the outrage did nothing to stop the forward motion of <b>Big Tech</b>. Timing, incentives, and lack of competition all play a part in explaining this unstoppable force.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
When <b>Facebook </b>and <b>Alphabet</b> (among others) reported their Q1 earnings last week, investors cheered. Facebook beat Wall Street estimates of <b>$11.41</b> <b>billion </b>by reporting <b><span style="color: #38761d;">$11.97 billion</span></b> in revenue, and <b><span style="color: #38761d;">$1.69</span></b> earnings-per-share, compared to the <b>$1.35</b> estimate. Google's parent company <b>Alphabet</b> also outperformed with revenue of <b><span style="color: #38761d;">$31.15 billion</span></b> versus the expected <b>$30.29 billion</b>, and an EPS of <b><span style="color: #38761d;">$13.33</span></b>, compared to the estimate of <b>$9.28</b>. Solid performance for an industry that was under fire for privacy and data issues.<br />
<br />
Why is that?<br />
<div>
<br />
Timing may be a factor. With Facebook getting called out more than halfway through the quarter, and Mark Zuckerberg making his appearance before Congress in the final weeks of the quarter, there was little time for advertisers to make any drastic changes to their advertising spend. We should keep an eye on how they perform in the next quarter, as we'll be able to see if there's truly been an impact. We anticipate a very small blip in Q2 as things begin to normalize, but it won't stop these juggernauts.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
One of the other reasons is that financial markets have given Facebook <a href="http://ethicalcorp.com/we-need-wake-existential-threat-surveillance-capitalism-poses-democracy">no incentive to care about users’ privacy</a>. As we saw this quarter and have witnessed in many previous quarters, investors continue to reward Big Tech companies whose business models rely on targeted advertising. To investors, these companies are seen as innovators in what is becoming known as <a href="https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=49122">surveillance capitalism</a>. In the ad tech business model, it's <b>business first, users second</b>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Not to mention that there really aren't any alternatives to advertising on Facebook and Google (although Amazon is making a go of it). The <b>duopoly </b>accounts for <a href="https://www.emarketer.com/content/exploring-the-duopoly-beyond-google-and-facebook">63 percent of US digital advertising revenue</a>, and given than they control so much traffic and attention, it's difficult for advertisers to go elsewhere. Combine that with the coming GDPR regulations in Europe that will require brands to ask for permission for users' data, and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/23/technology/privacy-regulation-facebook-google.html">Facebook and Google may even strengthen their positions</a>.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GmppSgst_as/WuZhBnCKceI/AAAAAAAA79o/bbLdXIPt-YUa_NeV8fv4jg3TjNDgKkargCLcBGAs/s1600/Duopoly.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="640" height="480" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GmppSgst_as/WuZhBnCKceI/AAAAAAAA79o/bbLdXIPt-YUa_NeV8fv4jg3TjNDgKkargCLcBGAs/s640/Duopoly.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div>
The <a href="https://rankingdigitalrights.org/index2018/">2018 Corporate Accountability Index</a> evaluated the 22 most powerful tech companies on their disclosed commitments and policies affecting freedom of expression and privacy. Many are falling short, having made meager progress over last year. That may change with GDPR, but there doesn't seem to be a solid push for this across the industry.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
So it's clear that brands need to step up and <a href="http://braintrust.partners/golden-customer-record/">own and control their own data</a>, which of course means that they'll have <a href="https://www.iab.com/insights/the-rise-of-the-21st-century-brand-economy/">a more direct relationship with customers</a>. There's only one issue with that: brands have spent the last decade or more outsourcing their digital and social efforts to platforms and agencies to do the work on their behalf. The results? <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/kimberlywhitler/2018/04/26/why-unilever-general-mills-and-procter-and-gamble-arent-good-at-marketing-in-the-modern-economy/#1997432f16a4">Brands simply aren't ready for modern-day marketing</a>.<br />
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
And so here we are. <a href="https://open.spotify.com/track/3G00YaeY44MDoLl1ZaCSR5?si=z06qiTt6RpGeefvCKGNQrw" target="_blank">Something's gotta give</a>.<br />
<br /></div>

When an Unstoppable Force Meets an Immovable Object

Amid all of the recent uproar of data privacy issues among a number of companies, the outrage did nothing to stop the forward motion of ...

The Invisible Brand Killer

<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NWW9WhCO1uo/WuHchgqyx7I/AAAAAAAA76E/k2Mvuqt3bZAS_pVQQHbIT4MVUWdfpA5YACLcBGAs/s1600/William%2BBlake%2B-%2BThe%2BBody%2Bof%2BAbel%2BFound%2Bby%2BAdam%2Band%2BEve.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1243" data-original-width="1600" height="496" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NWW9WhCO1uo/WuHchgqyx7I/AAAAAAAA76E/k2Mvuqt3bZAS_pVQQHbIT4MVUWdfpA5YACLcBGAs/s640/William%2BBlake%2B-%2BThe%2BBody%2Bof%2BAbel%2BFound%2Bby%2BAdam%2Band%2BEve.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
They say that high blood pressure is "the silent killer." However, what will ultimately defeat CPG brands is not a silent killer, but rather an invisible one.<br />
<br />
When you use an <b>Amazon Echo</b>, unless you've established some loyal relationship with a brand, you'll likely ask for the category of product you wish to buy (batteries, razor blades, laundry detergent, etc.). And what does Alexa do? It gives you those products that Amazon has predetermined that you should choose from — and <a href="https://retail.emarketer.com/article/brands-voices-may-muffled-on-amazon-echo/5a95909cebd4000744ae4143">more often than not, it's Amazon Choice and private labels</a>.<br />
<br />
Heh. Just think about that for a moment: Amazon Choice. That's exactly what it is: <b><u>Amazon's</u></b> choice! Not <i><b>yours</b></i>.<br />
<br />
When you surrender your products to third party services, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/big-consumer-brands-dont-have-an-answer-for-alexa-1519727401?mod=e2tw">you are at their mercy</a>. And with voice, it's sneaking up on us. It may not even be apparent that this is happening, which is what makes it so insidious. <a href="http://www.scottmonty.com/2017/05/is-future-of-ai-powered-search-audio-or.html">We don't have a visual layout of our options any more</a>; with the web, consumers could browse around and find the best deal or product for them. While voice-enabled ordering may save time for consumers, it might be detrimental at the same time, as consumers are more likely to choose whichever recommendation they hear <a href="https://youtu.be/BXEu8RcneZQ?t=54s">first or second</a>.<br />
<br />
So we face some tough decisions ahead: at the very minimum, brands must strive to make the processes and selections with voice-activated services <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/companies-explore-shopping-voice-53386589">as simple and easy as possible</a>. Less is more. But at the same time, brands need to fundamentally re-think their relationship with customers and with third-party distribution and sales platforms. <br />
<br />
Do you really want to be giving up both your data and your sales advantage to a voice-enabled retailer? Maybe we can get a voice vote on that.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<i>Image credit:<span style="border: none; font-family: "pt serif" , "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: 16px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"> </span><a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blake-Abel.jpg">The Body of Abel Found by Adam and Eve</a> by William Blake (public domain, via Wikimedia Commons)</i></div>
<div>
<i><br /></i></div>

The Invisible Brand Killer

They say that high blood pressure is "the silent killer." However, what will ultimately defeat CPG brands is not a silent kill...

A Matter of Trust

<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9VkMdL7ubnI/WuHena7FYTI/AAAAAAAA76Q/YePZM6Qu77ATz1Qlv-QHT5VxRkl76ZJRwCLcBGAs/s1600/Emanuel%2BLeutze%2B-%2BWashington%2BCrossing%2Bthe%2BDelaware.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="938" data-original-width="1600" height="374" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9VkMdL7ubnI/WuHena7FYTI/AAAAAAAA76Q/YePZM6Qu77ATz1Qlv-QHT5VxRkl76ZJRwCLcBGAs/s640/Emanuel%2BLeutze%2B-%2BWashington%2BCrossing%2Bthe%2BDelaware.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
There's no question that we live in a society in which information moves faster than ever before. So the old adage that "a lie is halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to put its pants on" is quite accurate.<br />
<br />
A recent study in <i>Science</i> found that <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/03/largest-study-ever-fake-news-mit-twitter/555104/">false news travels faster and wider</a> and that the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/08/technology/twitter-fake-news-research.html">blame lies with humans</a>. It's the same reason that gossip tabloids have always flourished and that the Kardashians are so widely followed. Human nature seems to gravitate toward a willingness to spread falsehoods and exaggerations.<br />
<br />
And this is why Facebook (and other Big Tech) <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/alexkantrowitz/facebooks-political-nightmare-is-about-to-get-worse?utm_term=.tp9eWegYrb#.rgLD0DBrgV">are in a pinch ahead of the midterm elections</a>. Because what they have to fix isn't just an algorithm: it's <b>human behavior</b>. Behavior that they've trained with Pavlovian-like responses tied to endorphins that 'likes' and 'retweets' cause in the brain. The ubiquitous nature of technology and its endemic effects make this a societal problem, with reverberations that are being felt in government, child-rearing, school, and more.<br />
<br />
There's still a need to be aware of and efforts made to stomp out fake news. Interestingly, even amid the growing era of machine learning, <a href="http://observer.com/2018/03/fake-news-newsguard-facebook-google-media/">journalists may be better suited to do sniff out fake news</a>. That is, journalists who aren't being <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/07/media/sinclair-broadcasting-promos-media-bashing/">coerced into bashing national media companies</a> by their employers. <br />
<br />
But what's the answer? One <i>New York Times</i> columnist <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/07/technology/two-months-news-newspapers.html">took a two-month hiatus from digital sources</a>, getting his news only from print newspapers. The result was a less frenetic, richer experience with himself and his family. And an Ohio man completely <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/style/the-man-who-knew-too-little.html">cut himself off from every kind of news</a>. Those kinds of solutions may not be for everyone, but they do indicate just how deep technology pervades our minds and the need to make some kind of change to our behavior.<br />
<br />
Ultimately, it comes down to <b>trust</b>: trusting the sources from which you get information, whether it's from brands, news sources, family members, Twitter accounts, or wherever you're engaging. And knowing that you have the power to influence others, because that's who people trust over all sources. Your employees, customers, fans, family and the like — they're the ones who will be the best resource when it comes to leading and defending your brand or your story.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
If you have a good relationship with them and can be consistent and persistent, you stand a chance of breaking through.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<i>Image credit: <a href="https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/11417">Washington Crossing the Delaware</a> by Emanuel Leutze, public domain.</i><br />
<i><br /></i></div>

A Matter of Trust

There's no question that we live in a society in which information moves faster than ever before. So the old adage that "a lie ...

Scott Monty - Strategic Communications & Leadership Advisor