Should Google buy Clear Channel?

Article in AdAge briefly explores that question. The phrase that jumped out of the story at me was, “automated sale of remnant ads.”

“Right now, through Google’s year-ago acquisition of dMarc, a radio systems company, it has been able to create an automated way to sell what is mostly remnant radio inventory, which remains unsold until the last minute. But, noted Mr. Bank, Google Audio is making several high-profile hires in the radio sales field in major radio markets. Now why, if Google Audio’s selling of remnant ad time is so automated, would there need to be so many high-priced radio ad sales folks.”

I’m pretty sure a big chunk of my salary for the past 20 years has come from acquiring and selling “remnant radio inventory.” Should companies that trade services for commercials on radio stations (we call it barter) be concerned about this? My guess is most station managers would rather have cash for his unsold commercials.

The Google-Clear Channel idea is an interesting one. CC has lot of stations and Google has figured some things out about advertising.

Scott Adams: Electronic Voting Machines

“…there’s a 100% chance that the voting machines will get hacked and all future elections will be rigged. But that doesn’t mean we’ll get a worse government. It probably means that the choice of the next American president will be taken out of the hands of deep-pocket, autofellating, corporate shitbags and put it into the hands of some teenager in Finland. How is that not an improvement?”

“Statistically speaking, any hacker who is skilled enough to rig the elections will also be smart enough to select politicians that believe in… oh, let’s say for example, science. Compare that to the current method where big money interests buy political ads that confuse snake-dancing simpletons until they vote for the guy who scares them the least.”

When your company screws up, don’t hide it. Blog it.

In one of Clyde Lear’s early blog posts, he talks about a mistake our company made some years ago. No weasly words, just “we shouldn’t have done that.”

I flashed on Clyde’s post as I read this article by David H. Freedman at Inc.com:

Many corporate blogs are sanitized, public-relations-oriented affairs intended to create bonds with existing and potential customers. Others serve as internal message boards to keep employees up to date. But I’m proposing something else: a blog that encourages employees and managers to tell their peers what they themselves have done wrong. It’s an easy step that could quickly effect a large, positive change in your corporate culture.

Real Lawyers Have Blogs

That’s the name of Kevin O’Keefe’s blog. He chatted with me today about blogging and lawyers and I could kick myself for not asking how he came up with “Real Lawyers Have Blogs.”

The blog is part of LexBlog, a consulting company that helps lawyers with Internet marketing and business development puts a strong emphasis on blogging.

Kevin was a trial lawyer for 17 years but stopped practicing in 1999 and founded an “online law community” called Prairielaw.com (which was later acquired by LexisNexis).

Kevin is my kind of blogger. He thinks every business should be blogging and says all lawyers will have blogs by the end of the decade (even though less than 1% of attorneys currently have blogs).

LexBlog has created some really nice looking blogs for their clients. These are some of the best looking websites I’ve seen and they got all the blog tools and features.

Kevin pooh-poohed my suggestion that blogging was difficult for some people. They either hadn’t found the right tools or weren’t ready to blog (yet). He’s right of course.

(audio no longer available)

After listening to Kevin for a few minutes and looking at and reading the blogs of some of his clients… I can’t imagine why every lawyer isn’t blogging. I guess the real ones are.

iPods replacing huge 3-ring binders?

Kevin O’Keefe (Real Lawyers Have Blogs) points to an interesting article about benefit managers putting content, such as benefits and wellness updates and bonus guidelines, online without always going through IT. The benefits department can easily become a news publisher of compensation and benefits information.

Pleased to say that we’ve been doing that at Learfield for some time now.

Kevin also reports at least one of his clients giving iPods to employees so as to keep employees abreast of company human resources matters and training materials. The iPods come preloaded with relevant content with updates streamed to employees via the net.

Now, that is a wired company.

You never hear the bullet that gets you

Chronic worriers are often reassured with, “90% of the things you worry about never happen.”

Let’s deal with the math first. Chronic worriers can come up with 100 things to worry about without breaking a sweat. So you’re telling us ten of them will probably come to pass. No good. Our first thought will be, “They’ll be the worst ten things!”

No, even if you improve our odds to 99%, you’ve simply encouraged us to focus all of our negative thoughts on that one item. Sort of a Hubble Telescope of Anxiety.

If you want to reassure us, remind us that conventional wisdom says we never hear the bullet that finally gets us.

We know –looking back– that most of the things we worried about did NOT happen. The really bad shit that happens in life is almost always totally unexpected. Out of the blue (or black, if you prefer). Didn’t see it coming at all.

See where I’m headed?

The very fact that you are worried about something almost guarantees that it won’t happen. It’s like a Worry Force Field.

  • Worried about your mid-term grades? (Your girl friend’s pregnant)
  • Anxious about the lab tests? (A 14 point Buck will jump in front of your Tercel)
  • Dreading a terrorist attack? (You’ll be safe inside one of Bush’s internment camps)

The more things you’re worried about…the less you have to worry about. Got it?

BBC looking for podcasters

BBCThe BBC is recruiting podcasters to help cover the US mid-term elections. They’re looking for:

  • Personal views of the race from people with an interesting perspective (perhaps you are a recent immigrant or an Iraq vet for example)
  • Bloggers, podcasters and vloggers who are covering their local race.
  • Anyone with a real interest in local politics and an ability to tell the story of the race in their town and state.
  • People from overseas with a real stake in the result.

The BBC blog post suggests some ways to contribute:

  • Phone or skype interviews
  • Emailing us an audio report
  • Emailing a short written report that we can read on air
  • Pointing us to a blog, podcast or vlog you’ve made covering the election.
  • Point us to a story you think we should be covering

The BBC says that “by enlisting your help we’ll have coverage that isn’t just about pundits and experts but gives us a real flavour of what the race is like for ordinary Americans that cuts through some of the stereotypes about politics in the US.”

One of the great strengths of our statewide radio networks has been the collaborative efforts of our affiliates. Radio station news directors throughout the states we serve would report on stories of statewide relevance, feed them back to the network, where we would uplink back to all stations on the network. Resulting in a whole that is greater than the sum of the parts.

But as radio station owners slashed their news operations (to reduce operating costs), a lot of “statewide” stories just didn’t get covered. It was all the local news folks could do just to keep on top of their “local” stories. No time to feed something to the network. (I should point out that many network affiliates still do an amazing job of contributing stories to our networks.) One can only hope that we’ll see a swing back toward strong, well-staffed local news departments.

But perhaps the next network will look more like what the BBC (and others) are putting together. Citizen Journalists (pick another name if you don’t like that tag) covering and sharing hyper-local news in an infinite variety of ways.

The tools already exist. A housewife in Joplin shoots 2 minutes of video outside her local polling place, including comments by those standing in line to vote. The Internet means distribution will never be a problem again. All that’s missing is some structure to pull it all together in some coherent manner. Perhaps something like the BBC effort.

“Yeah, but how do we make money with this model, smays?”

I’m not sure that is the right question but it’s a reasonable question.

First, the costs associated with setting up something like this are relatively small when compared to traditional broadcast networks with satellite trucks and producers and editors and so forth. But it would take time to grow (as did our networks). And you’d probably have competition since this is a game almost anyone can play.

So, is there enough profit in something like this to make it worth the investment of time and money? If you already have a cow that’s giving milk (cash), maybe not. If you don’t own a cow, this might seem like a good way to start building your herd. [via Podcasting News]

Are Bush and bin Laden on the same side?

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins explains “why God is a delusion, religion is a virus, and America has slipped back into the Dark Ages.” The following excerpt is from an article at Salon.com:

We’re seeing a rather unholy alliance between the burgeoning theocracy in the U.S. and its allies, the theocrats in the Islamic world. They are fighting the same battle: Christian on one side, Muslim on the other. The very large numbers of people in the United States and in Europe who don’t subscribe to that worldview are caught in the middle.

Actually, holy alliance would be a better phrase. Bush and bin Laden are really on the same side: the side of faith and violence against the side of reason and discussion. Both have implacable faith that they are right and the other is evil. Each believes that when he dies he is going to heaven. Each believes that if he could kill the other, his path to paradise in the next world would be even swifter. The delusional “next world” is welcome to both of them. This world would be a much better place without either of them.

“Throw the bums out!”

Tom Chartier’s election day advice:

“On Election Day, vote for the candidates who will tie up the system in knots. If enough quarrelsome fools are “elected,” the new members of Congress will spend all of their time squabbling amongst themselves and never get anything done. Perfect! That was the Founders’ plan. Government at its finest… unable to function!”

This sounds like a good idea, regardless of which party is “in power.” Mr. Chartier’s full post is worth a read. I found his quote from Atlas Shrugged especially chilling:

“Did you really think that we want those laws to be observed?… We want them broken… We’re after power and we mean it… There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced nor objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt.”