Our work entails porting traditional branding and business objectives to interactive outlets. Our clients are intimately familiar with the subject of our work, but often, not the medium. So while a corporate brand manager may have created plenty of content for advertising campaigns or physical mediums, the web or other outlets we recommend may be uncharted territory. This unfamiliarity can lead to a misunderstanding of how the interactive, living product works and create a negative domino effect. Because changes can be made at any time, the concept of lead time seems to be forgotten. Without strict adherence to a “drop deadline”, less care is sometimes given to the quality of deliverables. Additionally, one of the most frequent things I hear in my job is “we just couldn’t visualize it until we saw it on the web.” I can understand that, and this is why proofs are standard in the print industry. However, I am always amazed how much grammar is massaged once the language is on the web. If a statement is clunky, why is this only apparent when wrapped in graphics and navigation?

The products that we create and distribute have a lot at stake. They often represent major rebranding initiatives, lots of money and tons of blood, sweat and tears for our clients. The quality and impact of the launch is important to us and them. Based on this, and the problems I mentioned above, here are some recommendations I have when considering your next interactive project:

1. Interactive projects are living, but still follow a carefully constructed production process. We take time to inform our clients about our process and its importance. It is not that we love strict adherence to process, but the production process we follow has been proven to be the most efficient method for translating your message to the web. Efficient is important: it means the shortest production times and lowest costs.
2. You have an equal stake in the process. We are experts in our business, and think that you should leverage our expertise as much as possible. However, many clients chose to take on more responsibility in order to lower costs (copywriting is a frequent example). The effectiveness of this can be debated, but the rational behind it is understandable. If you chose to take on more responsibility in the project, understand how important it is to stick to the process. The process is not a tool for us to micromanage you, but to help ensure that the final product is as good as it can be while staying on-time and on-budget. One of the most important responsibilities you have is being careful that your deliverables are as the best they can be and that your approval is thoughtful and timely.
3. A living project has phases. Thanks to the living nature of our work, a phased development and launch approach is possible. In reality, something that does not make the initial cut is far less likely to ever happen, but a well-crafted phased strategy can be a way to combat budget and time constraints.
4. Leverage the living project to optimize your strategy. Clients are very relieved when out-of-date information is discovered and corrected or redacted. The living nature of the project becomes a safety net. This is important, but try to think of your living project as a means to continually hone you message and strategy. We would love to help you create strategies and campaigns that provide metrics that can be used to adjust your approach over time.
5. Growing content has a tremendous amount of worth. Sure, you can harness the living nature of your interactive project to correct static information, but creating new content adds tremendous worth to your online presence. You are more likely to boost return visitors and create more opportunities for search engines and linkers to share your top-level project and message.

In the end, a living project is a whole new beast, but it doesn’t have to be scary. Just remember that like any other product, there is a careful process for its creation. Most importantly, find a partner who can help you leverage the exciting characteristics of the living interactive and online projects to grow your brand and reach your business goals.

The digital and interactive sphere that we live and work in is constantly changing. We do a lot of research and a lot of experimenting to make sure that we stay ahead of the curve. We want to be experts. However, there are a lot of shops in our world who take the opposite approach. They see a world that is frequently misunderstood as an opportunity to sell digital snake oil. These vendors promise to work their black magic voodoo to send millions of visitors to your site through SEO or Social Media or Synergistic Buzzwordy Ninjery. If you feel like you are making a deal with the devil, be careful: you aren’t selling your soul, but you are probably being taken.

This digital wild west survives thanks to one thing: fear. Maybe you are afraid that your potential customers or competitors will pass you by in this crazy online/interactive/social landscape. Maybe you’re afraid that your boss or board or stakeholders will demand to know why you aren’t on Twitter, or why your site looks awful on a blackberry. Maybe you have seen your web traffic numbers for the first time and are shocked by the lack of impressions. But whatever you do, don’t hire a firm based on fear. Tackle this problem like you would any other business challenge: with strategic thinking and partners who have your best interests in mind.

You see, SEO or social media or many other seemingly crazy interactive strategies may be exactly what you need. The problem is that there is no miracle cure in this space. Every challenge demands an appropriate solution. But this appropriate solution is rarely the hot trend de jour.  We spend a lot of time and energy to ensure that we know the ins and outs of your situation and every possible option. At the end of the day we are going to recommend options that may seem like witchcraft, but we did not arrive at them through tarot or crystal balls or animal sacrifice. We want our clients to take our recommendations out of trust, not fear.

To that end, I am laying the groundwork for a series of posts that demystify what we do. My goal is to catch you up to speed on the latest trends and technology because they may actually be legitimate solutions for you. While you may not end up with enough technical skills to create your own HTML alternative to flash, you may be able to understand why we would advocate avoiding flash in some instances. Hopefully my collegues can chime in and cover their own areas of expertise. And even if you chose to work with a different firm, I hope that you are armed with the knowledge you need to make solid business decisions with a company you trust.

As you might guess, URL shorteners take long, hierarchical or nonsensical URL strings and crunch them down in to a more manageable size. This involves two steps: creating a short unique replacement URL, then redirecting to the original URL. The reasons for doing this include hiding the original URL, making long URLs easier to copy and paste or saving space in text-limited applications, like Twitter. The last thing you want to do is waste a bunch space with huge URLs if you only have 140 characters of real estate to work with. If your goal is to get people to click a link, you can really use those extra characters to enhance your argument for doing so or adding more hash tags to help searchers find your content. For example, which of these calls-to-action are you most likely to execute:

dj_c_check I blogged about a thing: http://www.manningproductions.com/blog/2010/02/html5-vs-adobe-this-sunday-in-5-d-space/ (113 characters)

OR:

the99percent Cognitive science behind why you should keep that brand name, sales pitch, explanation, etc SIMPLE: http://cot.ag/c6vkT1 (121 characters)

I am not trying to throw Curtis under the bus, just illustrate a point. Many large internet brands are developing or have already rolled out their own shortening systems: amzn.com, flic.kr, goo.gl, youtu.be, fb.me and gop.am (LOL and LOL2). Could you guess what any of those major online organizations were? Most of these systems take things a bit further. Bit.ly, a popular free URL shortener allows you to pick your own key for the URL you are shortening and provide analytic data, while Flikr, YouTube and Amazon use the unique keys that each piece of content already has as the shortened key.

By creating their own branded URL shortening systems, these organizations have protected or enhanced their brands in an number of ways:

1. The brand is transmitted along with the link when used by the general public, increasing exposure
2. These short, branded URLs are easier for mobile and social media users to spread, which may be the goal of the content and online strategy in the first place
3. Many people may be wary of unfamiliar domains and strange URLs that look like http://bit.ly/byQp52 or http://tinyurl.com/yjz5gka that the free services provide

While I may have imagined the NASA version of a branded URL shortener, I did discover go.usa.gov, which “lets government employees create short .gov URLs from official government domains, such as .gov, .mil, .si.edu, or .fed.us URLs.” NASA’s twitter authors have taken advantage of this beta program to help legitimize the links they post. If even the United States Government’s web strategy is more advanced than yours, perhaps it is time for you to rethink how you manage your brand online.

UPDATE: Found these brands with custom shortening systems this morning: arst.ch and nyti.ms. Cleverly, these online publications use this systems for their sharing tools, so when you use the “send to <social application>” button you spread the branded short URL.

UPDATE II: This article discusses using the Twitter and bit.ly APIs to customize how your site’s sharing functions work.

UPDATE III: Somewhere along the way Twitter rolled out the Favorites function for archiving specific posts for reference. I am now using that feature for saving tweets that like the mythical one that spurred this post.

As a single person with no itemized deductions or dependents, everything went fairly smoothly (or so it seemed). But unlike previous years, in which this service was free, this time before filing I was confronted with something different: at the end of the process I was told that e-filing would cost $49.95. Since I had already gone to the trouble of entering all my information (smart H&R Block, I admit), I figured the convenience of e-filing and the direct deposit of my refund would be worth it. I chalked it up to H&R Block finally creating enough demand for online services that they could begin charging.

This is the logo for H&R Block service I used -- that cost $49.95.

But trouble started shortly after I completed the filing process. I received an email saying that there had been problems with my return, and I was presented with a link to fix the errors and try again. After following the link and being told by H&R Block’s web application that there were, in fact, no errors with my return, I realized I was going to need to contact customer service. I was given the option to call or live chat. Seeing as how my whole motivation for using the online tool was convenience, I opted for the live chat. The following is a transcript of what transpired:

Dustin F.: Hello JUSTUS, welcome to H&R Block’s At Home Live Chat Support! How can we assist you today?
JUSTUS MOUSER: After filing, I received an email saying:
JUSTUS MOUSER:
Dear JUSTUS,
We’ve detected an issue with your e-filed return. Correct your return and resubmit it. Until you complete this process, your refund or balance due will remain unprocessed.
JUSTUS MOUSER: However, when I review my information, the program is unable to find any errors.
Dustin F.: I would be happy to research this for you.
JUSTUS MOUSER: When I run the “error check”, this is what I see:
JUSTUS MOUSER: You don’t have any errors. If you make any changes to your Federal return, run Error Check again before filing.
Dustin F.: Ok
Dustin F.: May I have a moment to research some information for you so we can solve this issue today?
JUSTUS MOUSER: yes

Current Customer Satisfaction (0-10): 7 - Upset with the fact that e-file failed, but happy there is chat support.

Dustin F.: Cannot E-file Due to an Incorrect Negative Value in Tax Return
JUSTUS MOUSER: does it say where the negative value occurs? so that i may correct it?
Dustin F.: Explains fix…
If you were able to correct a mistaken negative entry, follow the instructions to resubmit your return electronically. Otherwise, you will have to file your return on standard paper forms.
JUSTUS MOUSER: ok, I am reviewing information trying to find the negative value. can I stay on the chat until I determine if I can fix this issue?
Dustin F.: yes.
JUSTUS MOUSER: In my W-2 information, I located a negative value for box 14
Dustin F.: Ok, correct the entry and you should be good.

Current Customer Satisfaction (0-10): 8 - Realizing software failed, but they apparently have resolved issue.

JUSTUS MOUSER: I’ve fixed that entry, and I am still getting a message that says I can’t file electronically
Dustin F.: Ok, on some rejections the IRS requires them to be printed and mailed.
JUSTUS MOUSER: Ok, but I have already used my credit card to pay the eFile fee
Dustin F.: I understand and I am sorry but e-file is not guaranteed.

Current Customer Satisfaction (0-10): 2 - Really? Just mail it in? That’s the answer?

JUSTUS MOUSER: The actual calculation of the tax amount was something I could have done quite easily myself if I was going to mail the paperwork. So I paid 49.95 for nothing?
Dustin F.: Im sorry for the inconvenience sir.

Current Customer Satisfaction (0-10): 0 - Thinking about how this would never fly in other scenarios…what if I bought a latte at Starbucks and after handing me an empty cup, they apologized for the ‘inconvenience’.

JUSTUS MOUSER: Is that the H&R Block policy; to refer to collecting 49.95 from its customers for unsuccessfully preparing the return and referring to it as an incovenience?
Dustin F.: Sir I don’t know what you want me to say, e-filing isn’t guaranteed. Im sorry your return was rejected and the IRS is requiring that you print and mail your return in.
JUSTUS MOUSER: But my eFile was rejected because of an error in the return prepared by the H&R Block software. The ‘error check’ portion of the application did not report that any information was entered incorrectly.
Dustin F.: have you tried every way to e-file your return because the instructions say if you fixed the error then follow the steps to resubmit your return electronically
JUSTUS MOUSER: ‘Following the steps” is predicated on the fact that the web application has found an error. Because the application is finding no such error, I am not being presented with any further steps to follow.

Current Customer Satisfaction (0-10): -2 - Realizing that this is going nowhere. Imagining other things I could have spent $50 on.

Dustin F.: I can’t seem to find a way so the only way I know that you can file is to print and mail.
JUSTUS MOUSER: Well I skipped the customer service survey portion of the process. But I would classify my experience as extremely unsatisfactory.
JUSTUS MOUSER: I will not be using H&R Block services in the future.
Dustin F.: I’m sorry you feel that way.
JUSTUS MOUSER: I’m sorry that H&R Block is taking the position that this is an acceptable level of service for its customers
Dustin F.: Were not the ones requiring you to print and mail, the IRS is.

Current Customer Satisfaction (0-10): -5 - At this point, Dustin is basically holding up his middle finger at me.

Dustin F.: Is there anything else we are able to assist you with today?
JUSTUS MOUSER: I can be assisted with a refund of $49.95.
Dustin F.: Im sorry sir I can’t do that because you already e-filed and e-filing is not guaranteed.
JUSTUS MOUSER: I intend to post a transcript of this conversation with a description of my experience online. As a representative of H&R Block, is there anything else you would like to add before I do so?
Dustin F.: No sir, there sure isn’t.
JUSTUS MOUSER: I appreciate your time and regret that this issue could not be resolved.

Current Customer Satisfaction (0-10): -7 - There you have it.

I ended up using the free tax filing service that is available on the IRS website and had my return e-filed in about 15 minutes. I would recommend anyone with simple returns go this route.

Clearly you’ll need an HTML5-ready browser if you want to play (with) it.  It’s interesting enough, especially if you’re from the generation that grew up with Doom (and Marathon, for those of you who were Mac users before it was cool).  As my friend noted, it even includes “5D space.”

What really precipitated from this sharing between gamers-cum-developers was a discussion about Adobe and their future. The gist of our tête-à-tête was the increasing capabilities of simple HTML, and the subsequent lessening of importance for Flash, as the standard grows.

The highlight:

Jonathan: “Adobe is f@%#ed. Finally the web will be free of Flash[.] it’s very clear that the iPhone/iPad not having flash is a volley in this… flash sucks, the sooner it’s gone, the better… if Adobe suddenly decides that they’re going to overlay every flash object with an ad… they could do it… and what recourse does anyone have?”

I’ll save my judgment about the iPhone and iPad—though it is telling that the <canvas> element was originally developed by Apple, though maybe not as a Flash-killer, per se—but I had been relatively unmoved by the argument that Flash should go away (one that my friend has upheld for quite some time) until he made the point about Adobe being the sole gatekeeper to so much content on the web.  I have my complaints about Flash, the vast majority of which revolve around its complicated interweaving of demi-object-oriented code and GUI-based animating, but I don’t particularly want it to die a terrible death.  In fact, AS3 has all but done away with most of my development-related complaints. That said, I also don’t want ads being placed on content that I’ve developed for clients.  It may be my own relative ignorance, or it might actually be a true gray area, but it seems to me there’s no particular standard for that type of thing.  As Mitch pointed out recently, it seems like every time YouTube releases a new privacy statement, it’s less privacy and more statement.  But at least there is a statement—you have to go past it to even put your content on their site.  And it is on their site, so… it kind of makes sense.  Where does something like Adobe player fall in the scheme of things. It is their player.  Yeah, I know for sure that I don’t know.

So my initial thought was one of complete rebellion: “yeah, $#@% Adobe, HTML5 for life!”  After discussing it at lunch with Mitch and Patrick, though, we hit upon the idea that it’s a two-way street. Sure, HTML5 gaining momentum would mean less of a, let’s say, market share for Adobe.  Conversely, though, it also means that Adobe will have to be competitive and, presumably, not throw ad overlays on their player. To be fair, that probably wouldn’t really have worked well for them anyway, though it is a compelling example.  There are, however, plenty of more insidious things they could be (and probably are) doing.

Anyway, this was all brought up at lunch at the tail end of a discussion I started by telling a short story about my experience with Netflix.  TL;DR I went to cancel my subscription, discovered (at Netflix’s insistence) that I could put it “on hold” instead, and did so.  This choice resulted from the fact that I’d been watching things and playing games mostly through my PC and wasn’t using Netflix so much.  This, in turn, caused me to realize that, as distribution channels multiply and companies pop up to make use of them, where we’d really come down to just a few streams not so long ago—TV and VHS->LD->VCD->DVD on one side and a few video game systems on the other (most of the titles for which crossed platforms anyway)—now we had myriad streams for acquiring our “content.” A blurring of the lines between the many platforms that exist for tapping into these streams is a definite reality too. I can download video games on Steam while watching live sports on ESPN360 and buffering an on-demand movie from any number of sources.

It sure seems to me that media cyclically experiences a “bang and crunch” model with regards to delivery. Inventing, embracing, and gainsaying any new stream is as viable a passtime as trading futures these days.  And, if you think about it, doesn’t every new device seem to sell itself by trying to harness as many content streams as possible, perhaps even by combining them to help make sense in an oversaturated world?  So I guess that’s the genesis of the cycle.  I tend to like things simple, but sometimes the lure of a new stream is so strong I forget that I don’t even like most content, regardless of medium or stream or platform.  It’s a powerful thing.  Since we love analogies (and stories) around here, I guess it’s a little like me wandering around the Merchandise Mart’s Luxe Home after giving blood recently. Everything was packaged in such a slick way that, in my lightheaded stupor, I was ready to hire a contractor on the spot without the money, space, or really desire to own any of it.

As it should be obvious by now, I am Manning’s productivity nerd. I am a lay member of the cult of Getting Things Done. I wanted to offer up a  brief observation from my day-to-day work. Like the GTD project planning model, the GTD system consists of five discrete steps:

1. Capture everything that you can possible think of
2. Process those thoughts into physical actions
3. Organize those actions in to contextual lists (Things that can only be done at work, or require an internet connection)
4. Review lists and grab the actions that make sense for your context, time, energy
5. Do the best action

Like any system, it is only as good as the weakest link. If you stop processing all your random thoughts, you will begin to realize that your lists are out of date and then you will stop trusting your system.

For me the key to staying current on my system is making sure I capture everything.  The rule for capture is this: have as many capture tools as you need, but as few as you can get by on. The best way for me to accomplish this is to always have a pad of paper and pen at hand, but ideally, it will be the same pad every time. As the number of places that things are collected expands, the number of places you will have to process from later. Something that is not processed in a timely manner has no more value than if it was never captured.

Ergo, I think that the iPad will become a real platform for outreach and development. People have downloaded over one billion iPhone/iPod apps; if sold apps equaled even one tenth of 1 percent, that would be one million. And not all apps are time sucks;  some of them connect you with actual content. Either way, that is a lot of impressions. I am watching the keynote in the background while I write this and have skipped to the app section. All iPhone apps will work natively and will even scale gracefully via pixel-doubling. Additionally, the SDK has been released for developing iPad that leverage the uniqueness of the device.

Can we use the iPad as either a revenue stream (sold apps) or delivery tool for focused content that serves a specific purpose? Hopefully other members of the team will continue the discussion.

UPDATE: Apparently the print industry believes the iPad “will breathe new life into their struggling industry“, which is not what I meant. I think said industry believes every new technology is magically going to solve their bloated, archaic business practices. This is misguided. Fix what is wrong, don’t just hold out for the next big thing that will allow you to keep making the same mistakes that have left your industry in serious trouble for the last decade. If Manning tried to sell every client on what we did 15 years ago, we would be dead. Our ability to thrive through the changing market requires acute awareness of the present and future landscape, and then use that understanding to help our clients achieve their business goals. We may pitch award-winning video services, but only if it is right for the goals, messages and audience. We sure as hell are not going to pitch

Román Cortés’ 3D Coke Can… entirely done in CSS

I’ve been following Román Cortés’ blog for some time now, as much for some reading en español as for the artistic and development-related content. I think the first post of his I saw was a reblogged copy of his CSS Homer, which shows Homer Simpson’s iconic face created entirely with textual and CSS elements. A nifty trick.

Recently, Román has continued his CSS explorations with some really fascinating, if not particularly practical, tricks and even forays into CSS2.

He’s posted some interesting things including a pseudo-3D CSS version of Velázquez’s famous Las Meninas and, rocketing to fame lately on Digg and Reddit, a 3D CSS Coke can. It’s really worth a look. I would say that what he’s doing is essentially replicating Flash capabilities without using Flash…

Check out his blog.

3D Las Meninas, also entirely CSS by Román Cortés’