the view from a far is sometimes sharper

Derren Brown is a mentalist. His book about the trade is quite a spell binding (boom tish!) read.

Among the many gems, he discusses the fact that it is easier for him to play his tricks on those who watch him the closest. He flipped the old saying "for every action there is an equal reaction" by stating that for every bit of concentration in one part of the brain and on one part of his act, there is a loss of concentration in another part of the brain and on another part of his act.

This simple insight allows him to play with people. With great ease.

However, the people he as a magician fears most are the once who don't give him their full attention, those who glimpse out of the corner of their eyes to see what it is he is doing. No pressure is there on them to follow. They are not paying attention to a single part, but just glance to see the entire act. And then spot the cheat quite easy.

Sometimes we as admen to can get so deep into research/work or as a brand in our products, that we just see parts and are being played without even knowing it.

So remember to cultivate blank slates. Be it in your agency, or those that don't fit into the target group you do focusgroups with.

Those with no pressure to come up with anything, that have no stake in your brand. Have them glance your work, brand or thinking. Forget territorial pissing and be suprised to learn a lot.

P.S. over on his blog Northern makes an very good case for blank slates in your own life. Go and read.

the power of words

Watching a regional football derby yesterday it struck me: these players were more ferocious, more physical, more inclined to play rough, to do whatever it took to win that derby not because of what the derby meant to both teams. It was because of what the word derby means. period.


It is this implicitness, the context of the word that these players understood. The reff understood, the crowd understood. Derby = hard play, full of fouls, at breakneck pace. More was allowed, because of the frame it was presented in.


Briefing is one of those words that lately has frustrated me. If say the agency we work with gives feedback about the briefing they received it somehow always revolves around questions of format, channel choice, pay off. It seems that the auto pilot kicks in whenever they hear the word briefing, and it takes them back to when they learned about it in school. Briefing = ......


Words. Context. We often glance over it, but once you get down to the nitty gritty of it, it is powerfull. Especially when the implicit meaning is understood but not articulated. When the illusion of civility is upheld or explicitly removed.



They can grant us room to grow or close our way of thinking down.


Exploring vs Drilling for oil


Immigrant vs illigal Alien


Words dictacte so much of the space we can, allow ourselves to take, and can help us articulate the reasons behind actions not explicitly mentioned, that a dictionary is this marketeers new friend. Perhaps obvious to some, but important enough to me to repeat.

House MD or Doctor Melfi

McCain and Obama. Bare with me. From an archetypical point of view.

the US/Western voter is a Hyperchondriac (compared to 90% of the people of the world, in terms of problems)

Obama is the Therapist.

McCain is the Surgeon.

O is centered around the mind and emotions. 

He talks and he listens. He is a chance for all the people to wallow in their own sorrow and to feel bad together. dream of better together. He is sympathetic. He wants to get to the root of it all and change us, it. He wants us to reach our full potential. But what he does not mention to much, but what people instinctively do know is that profound change is a long and hard road to travel. It takes guts to look at oneself and say, I do not measure up, I need to change. He knows that the problems patients talk about are not the root, that the solutions that they ask for are patchwork at best. He must educate and change.

But in reality there is no clear game plan from his side, it's a bit ambigious. We know it's cureable, but there is now easy one fit's all solution. it's a combo of medicine and therapy. It takes time. 

And like the great Soprano's have shown us, It's not always up to the physician, but the patient, whether one get's better.

Most (and please do not see this as a lightharted attempt to make fun of menatal illness,) people who see someone about their problems,  just wanna have an excuse " I am depressed, give me medication" or hear " It's not your fault, your childhood was bad" and then walk out with a solution.

Positive Change does not come easy. Negative Change does. Negative stuff impacts us way more than the good. Think sickness, death, pain etc. Negative is profound yet instant. Positive is fleeting yet longterm.

Enter the Surgeon. he talks about the body.

M says: mam/sir, you are ill. Boom. Negative. But the good news is, I am a Surgeon and I know what is wrong and how to fix it. Let's cut it out. He validates and than goes into default mode, whatever the problem. You don't know, because at that time the patient is asleep.

The fix is quick, but the recovery takes time. See how it's framed nice. Sure, you do not mind the long recovery, if the fix is immediate. 

You like this. it's straight talk. No flip flop. this it what you wanna hear. Perhaps not what you need, perhaps so.

And so what do you as a hypochondriac do? U want validation of your problem!

The validation comes in the form of the solution u get. A scar to prove it was real after all, or a mirror held up that you that confronts you with the fact that it's all in your mind and it wll take time to deal with that? Both hurt, one on the outside and not for long, the other on the inside and long.

Real change or illusion of change. 

If you ask the people at QVC, they'd laugh at the fact that you even have to ask.

right to healthy food

I know this is a bit of a western train of thought, but amma go with it anyways.

Why does the constitution in most western world countries not have a garantuee in it with regards to healthy food? with epidemic proportions, it seems that the basic right to food (as part of the right to shelter, water, freedom of speech, etc) needs some re-evaluating.

Food in itself has become something of an abstract thought. That what most of us consume today, would not be recognized just a couple of generations ago.

This in itself is not evil. But the elements of food have not changed as dramatically as the form in which it is being presented.

So should there be a garantuee in the constitution?

Well for one it would kickstart checks and balances principles. If it's a right, it will have advocates and governamental protection.

Secondly it would also serve as a prerequisite whenever the west starts to export democracy again. Whick they/we will always keep doing. So the kids in the EU to be countries than would have some inbuild protection, when the socities there get all the aillments of luxury we now face in the West.

On the other hand: how to define and enforce it? food is culture and culture does not always paint in broad strokes.

I know for a fact that my father used to be laughed at by his Dutch pittbosses when he used to eat garlic at lunch. It was considered a weed and not very good for you. Times do change, as now the Dutch eat it almost as much. 

So if we are to garantuee the right to healthy food, perhaps we should look at it from a reverse angle, the obligation to produce food or feeding elements, that in the tradition of medicine: Do no harm. Food that has an Darwin-esque quality to it. Food that has been around for more than two generations. If you have a food that has been around for more than 2 generations, you could argue that the negative effects of the food are outweighed by the postive ones, thus adding to the survival of the species, with adjustments possible for cultural difference.

So in short order: we get all the old folks and put in front of them dishes. if they don't know them they are gone. of course this would hurt the world economy, but that's an added bonus ;)

crackpot thinking or something to it?

world community grid

via mr Maschmeyer

great example of building on existing relationships

what if...rapid response via existing means

this idea got me thinking.

There are printshops, shops for t-shirts and the shops like Kinko's. These shops have an infrastructure in place to produce. 

What if you created a UN server? this server would kickstart when great disasters happen. 

From this server you, as a shop, could download prints. On this server as a designer, artist, you could upload stuff to be printed. all for charity. What you do is three things: 

1) make use of existing worldwide distribution to facilitate a charity/money scheme.

2) you could kickstart an extra money revenue, by having a online/televised fashion show, with limited editions. Like you could have a Paris limited edition done by some designer, and have an London Hirst limited edition.

3) make use of existing desire to have t shirt with great motifs on them, and or the need to have something haning from the wall.

a tentative first step in a new thought direction for me. So any and all feedback is welcome

note to self: sender is nothing without receiver

If you are a planner, remember the consumer, if you are a creative remember the consumer, if you are a client remember the consumer. Sure it helps if you can throw it 50 yards, or do a behind the back no look bounce pass between the legs. But...

If it ain't caught, you don't score