According to Cult of Mac (**shudder**) this ad ran as a full page in the New York Times last week. While Apple isn't specifically mentioned, the reference to stolen nudes is an obvious hit at the company, whose iCloud security was questioned in the breach. (Apple denies this.)
Paypal obviously feels the heat from the new iPhone's Apple Pay feature, so casting doubt on Apple's general security might seem like a great idea. But it seems pretty underhanded to me.
Snapchat, which has just been made available for Android devices (it's been on iPhone for a year), is an app that lets people put an expiry date on the photos they share with friends on their mobile devices.
As of October 28, they were celebrating "over 1 billion snaps" shared worldwide. Users set who can see their pics, and how long they can see them for before they are deleted from the snapchat server. If the recipient takes a screenshot, the sender is notified — but cannot erase it.
The main product benefit advertised is speed: "real time picture chatting" that goes faster than e-mails or other messaging (since the picture lives on an external server).
At the Apple Store, the app has the following disclaimer:
Rated 12+ for the following:Infrequent/Mild Mature/Suggestive ThemesInfrequent/Mild Sexual Content or NudityInfrequent/Mild Profanity or Crude HumorInfrequent/Mild Alcohol, Tobacco, or Drug Use or References
In other words, they just expect — even sanction — that users are doing all the unfortunate things they do with their camera phones now. But does making sexting seem safer actually encourage it?
That might not be fair. I imagine the encouragement will come from horny jerks on the other end of the line, who will use the "temporary" nature of the picture as a reason for oversharing.
When you send or receive messages using the Snapchat services, we temporarily process and store your images in order to provide our services. Although we attempt to delete image data as soon as possible after the message is transmitted, we cannot guarantee that the message contents will be deleted in every case. For example, users may take a picture of the message contents with another imaging device or capture a screenshot of the message contents on the device screen. Consequently, we are not able to guarantee that your messaging data will be deleted in all instances. Messages, therefore, are sent at the risk of the user.
The app's message, then, is a mixed one: We don't guarantee security, and we can't imagine you using this for anything unseemly. But here are some tools to make sexting easier. Not that we think you're sexting. It's the app equivalent of a head shop.
Sir Richard's Condoms, always a cheeky marketer, has rolled out a new app for men who can only be motivated by their loved one's T&A.
"Pretty Please," according to the Denver Egotist, "challenges the recipient to agree to complete a task before they’re granted permission to view a photo — a photo uploaded by a lover that's presumably sexy and worth doing said chore in order to unlock." It will also auto-delete the picture before the woman ends up as the next Scarlett Johansson. (Interestingly, the screen caps at the Apple App Store no longer feature the boudoir shot as seen at the top of this post.)
I know it's all in fun, however it's kind of a depressing stereotype that women use sex as currency and men are lazy slobs who are only in it for the orgasm.
I suppose the sexting could go both ways, in theory, but to be honest I doubt I could convince my spouse to take out the garbage by promising her a photo of my junk.
The speed and temporary nature of social media feeds lead to some interesting contrasts.
In my Facebook newsfeed yesterday, I first took note of a Design Taxi link posted by Marc from Osocio about "The World’s Scientifically Most Beautiful Woman".
Here she is:
18-year-old student Florence Colgate has the most naturally perfect face, according to a British lifestyle show's nationwide search.
“Florence has all the classic signs of beauty,” Carmen Lefèvre, of The Perception Lab at the University of St Andrews’ School of Psychology, told The Daily Mail. “She has large eyes, high cheekbones, full lips and a fair complexion. Symmetry appears to be a very important cue to attractiveness.”
Along with — apparently — blonde hair, blue eyes and light, unblemished skin.
I won't even get into the Nordicism of all this. (The Mail actually called her "'Britain's most beautiful face".) There have been enough blogposts about that issue already. I'm more interested in the parts that sociobiologists have tried to rationalize.
For example, symmetry is seen as a sign of good genes and good health. Maladaptive mutations, as well as childhood disease and injury, can affect symmetry. It's seen as a way to advertise good health and disease resistance — in other words, that person is a good source of healthy babies.
The other features are ethnically specific. Blonde hair and big blue eyes are what are known as "neoteny" — that is, babylike features kept into adulthood. All humans are very neotenic apes, retaining our round-headed juvenile chimp features throughout our lives.
The loss of pigment that gave northern people lighter skin is also an adaptive mutation to absorb more vitamin D from less sun exposure. I personally believe that lightening of skin and eyes in parts of those populations came along for the ride, then got amplified by sexual selection because youth is attractive.
A smartphone app allows users to assess their own symmetry based on some unknown standards. It's like "Hot or Not", but without the subjectivity of human feedback.
"How ugly are you? For over 3 million users, Ugly Meter has been the go-to iPhone App that won’t lie when it comes to determining how attractive or ugly you are. Just snap a picture of yourself (or someone else) in the app and hit the scan button. The Ugly Meter will scan your face and determine just how ugly you are and dispense advice accordingly. Ugly Meter then allows you to post the results to Facebook or Twitter."
I wonder about the ethnic standards of beauty behind this, too. Although my own northern Euro ancestry doesn't seem to have helped much:
I blame the lighting.
I tried a few more times, and found that the insults got pretty creative.
To test the baseline, I tried scanning a screenshot of Miss Colgate:
Clearly, the creators of this app and the people behind the British talent search read the same books. Or something.
But then what happens when I scan a head-on glamour pic of Iman, a woman so ethereally beautiful, she got David Bowie to settle down:
I must have held the camera funny. I'll try again:
Ummm...
But hey, there was nothing scientific about this (mostly because I don't have all day to fart around with my iPhone). If you don't mind giving them your 99¢, you can find out for yourself what "beautiful" really means.
(I'll update this post with more scans, as I get a chance.)
"The 'Breastie' iPhone case has the back part shaped like a breast, which is supposed to enable a better ‘grip’. Cases are available in black or pink and retail for $20. Sounds like this is a great cause–except users will look like creeps out in public."
I wonder when the testicular cancer model is coming out?
I'm old enough to remember what it was like when people smoked on airplanes. When it landed, as soon as the "no smoking" and "fasten seatbelts" signs went dim, half the passengers went for their pocket pack and lit a cigarette. Today, you can see the exact same coordinated gesture... but they reach for their smartphones.
With so much in common, it was only a matter of time before a tobacco company came up with an app for iPhone. And they have. Or at least the concept is there.
"Bum(p) a Smoke" is an app idea from Miami Ad School that lets casual smokers bum a virtual cigarette from heavier smokers via the built-in "bump" data transfer capability by which you tap iPhones to exchange info. The parasitic smoker can then redeem their bumps for real tobacco once they fill a digital pack.
What a brilliant idea. Because if there's one thing we need, it's to encourage those "I only smoke when I drink! Tee hee hee!" weasels. But don't worry, it's not real.
The news on ZDNet is that SugarSugar, "The world's most effective and discreet place for finding Sugar Daddy and Sugar Baby relationships" will be launching “an innovative mobile application for locating singles interested in the ’sugar’ lifestyle’” for the iPhone, iPod touch, iPad, Android, and BlackBerry on June 1st.
You can forgive the typo. They're obviously in love.
"SugarSugar.com is for generous men looking to spoil, and dynamic women looking for financial support with bills, or who just need some excitement in life! Started by a real sugar baby, SugarSugar.com only accepts true, proven sugar daddies and sugar babies, and provides a staff of sugar dating experts to help you find the perfect mutually beneficial arrangement.
Sugar Daddy relationships are as old as mankind itself. Men have a natural instinct to surround themselves with beauty, and women have always sought out the security of a mature, financially stable man. While these aren't the only qualifications for a good dating experience, they are a good place to start!
Women: never worry about money again!
Men: join the only dating site where women outnumber you by 8-to-1.
Begin finding your perfect Sugar Daddy or Sugar Baby by creating your free profile now. Start living the sweet life!"
The sweet life of transactional sex.
Nobody can believe that Apple's famously prudish App Store approved this. We'll have to see if it actually makes it through.
For women in bikinis, images are rejected seemingly at random. One reviewer will object to a particular image and pass others, the next reviewer will find an objectionable image in the batch that the first reviewer passed. And on it goes.
Anything related to politicians will most likely be rejected.
But what the App Store's reviewers clearly have no objection to is anti-gay apps.
The Atlantic reports that "More than 90,000 people have signed a petition hosted on Change.org demanding that Apple remove an application from the iTunes Store that promises to deliver 'freedom from homosexuality through the power of Jesus Christ.'"
The app, by conservative Christian group Exodus International, earned a 4+ rating from Apple, which Exodus points out means that "applications in this category contain no objectionable material".
The group is entirely dedicated to "curing" homosexuality. From their site:
Exodus International believes… that God created us as human beings in His image as male and female and that the only biblically sanctioned expression of sexuality is between a man and a woman who are married to one another. Exodus International believes that our biological sex is not open to limitless self-created categories, but has boundaries determined by God, our Creator.
Exodus International believes… that the health of individuals, children and our culture is intimately linked to the well being of natural marriage and its biblical intention — a sacred, legal, and social union ordained by God to be a life-long, sexually exclusive relationship between one man and one woman.
People have a right to their beliefs, but lets remember that, couched in this polite language, is the assertion that gay people are choosing to sin against God, and denying their own "normal" biology.
While I don't wish to pollute my iPhone by checking out the app in person, Exodus was kind enough to provide screen grabs in their press release:
Looks so harmless...
As of this writing, it's still there. But it may not be for long.
Last year, Apple approved — then pulled — The Manhattan Declaration, another app that opposed gay marriage on religious grounds after being petitioned to do so.
These are challenging times for American marketers. And while I am offended by the content of the Exodus app, I am also concerned by Apple's seemingly arbitrary management of standards. As a business, they're primarily interested in appealing to the maximum number of people possible by being as neutral and inoffensive as possible. (While in private contributing $100K to No to Prop 8.)
This is a dangerous game. Apple would to well to set, and maintain, consistent standards for app content that reflect modern human rights. Would they support an app that offered to "cure" someone of their ethnicity or gender, no wonder how gently worded? The idea that natural homosexuality does not exist, and that it is a mental disorder in need of a cure, is a belief that people are "allowed" to have in private. But so are theories of racial superiority. That doesn't mean it's a suitable topic for a über-controlled brand like Apple to endorse.
If you've been watching Joannie Rochette's iheartmom video on YouTube, or if you visited iheartmom.ca, you probably noticed a funny little piece of abstract art with a "Mobio" logo on it.
You may also be wondering "what IS that thing?"
Mobio Identity Systems is a Vancouver company that has developed a new way to make electronic payments, get information, or connect with specific content via smartphones.
Don't worry, before we started this campaign, I hadn't heard of them either. But our client, the University of Ottawa Heart Institute had. They premiered the technology on their annual telethon on CTV a few weeks ago, on March 28.
"The Ottawa Heart Institute has always been on the cutting edge of technology and we believe Mobio will increase their donation base and encourage a new generation of young mobile smartphone users to donate to this worthy organization."
So how does it work? They included this handy video:
The telethon raised over $5 million, actually exceeding its goal. How many donations came via Mobio? According to the Ottawa Citizen, the high-tech gimmick helped "a bit".
But such is the case for early adopters. MobioID sees great potential for fundraisers in this technology, especially with the 45-and-under crowd, including:
• Ability to inject innovation into the widely traditional telethon space. • Ability to target younger audiences and appeal to Gen X and Y. • Increased geographical reach (Mobio barcodes can go viral on Twitter, Facebook, email and phone to phone) • Ongoing donations possible post-event (once a custom barcode is created it can be used indefinitely in print, advertising, TV, T-shirts etc.)
Of course, the application also holds great promise for e-commerce, allowing on-the-spot impulse purchases from anywhere.
Now that you know what Mobio is, you'll probably start to notice it popping up in geekier circles. Just last weekend, I put down my copy of SuperFreakonomics (which is hard to do) and noticed a Mobio 2-D barcode on the back cover, with an invitation to get more info.
Yesterday's Blackberry outage was a real panic for some professionals, who have grown to depend on their PDAs as an extension of themselves. But in my opinion these glitches are useful reminders of how much business and life have really changed in the past 10-15 years.
I still remember the boom-boom high tech '90s, when many of my clients were excited by the idea of transforming the way people do business, share, and communicate. Songs like Jesus Jones' "Right Here, Right Now" were co-opted by companies like AT&T to express the revolution that was going on. But the classic bit of '90s optimism and foresight was AT&T's 1993 "You Will" campaign:
So here we are in 2009. I'm blogging at you using a late '90s medium, but you may be reading this on a hand-held device in an elevator, a netbook in a coffee shop, on your HD TV, or a laptop on the bus. You can comment on it, share it, even subscribe to it (hint, hint) so you get notified the second I hit "publish post". Awesome, isn't it?
Isn't it?
I love the convenience of our current communication technology. Don't get me wrong. But new opportunities to collaborate and connect have their downsides too. So allow me to present...
The five times when you need to go offline:
1) When multitasking gets just plain rude
I run a lot of meetings, but I hate meetings as much as everyone else. I want them to be organized, focussed, and productive. But somehow, we have allowed it to be okay for people to read e-mails, text message, and instant message while other people are talking. What the hell?
Whether you're a client or a colleague, I can't pretend that I'm not annoyed by this kind of behaviour. I wish that we could post a sign in our boardroom saying "one conversation at a time, please". While you may think you're being efficient by splitting your attention in the meeting to get other things done, it actually slows down everyone else because you are not keeping up. Stop it please. It's as rude as taking a phone call mid-meeting.
2) When project management turns into buck-passing
One of the other problems with our ubiquitous access to e-mail is the temptation to do everything on that medium. In an ordinary conversation, people have to think about what they're saying. But when you receive an e-mail with a problem, it's easier to forward it to someone else to interpret and resolve than to actually participate intellectually in the resolution. Bad.
3) When you end up making a mountain out of an e-mail trail
Many people suck at expressing themselves in writing. e-mail is especially bad because it lacks nuance or the context of tone or body language. It's not an emotive medium, and yet people make the mistake of committing emotions to the permanent record by ranting and raving via e-mail. Big mistake. Especially if many CCs are involved. You may want to "take it back", but it's out there forever.
4) When you contribute to the death of prose
I'm old enough to have had pen pals. I loved writing letters. That probably helped me develop as a writer.
I'm not one of these people who thinks that texting and online jargon are killing the English language. It has to evolve to serve the needs of the day. But what I do find is that fewer and fewer people coming out of university have the ability to organize their thoughts in a format of more than 50 words.
When I put out an open call for entry-level Copywriters a couple of years ago, I insisted on them writing me an original cover letter. The ones I interviewed had to write a 700-word advertorial as a test. I found my worthy candidates, but I also found that many others who wanted to write for a living were incapable of structuring their thoughts, even in an e-mail. Add to that some truly pathetic spelling, grammar, and general sloppiness. Won't someone please think of the next generation of writers?
I agree that e-mail should be written differently than traditional business correspondence. But I also believe that it takes more thought to compose a concise message than a long-winded one. The smaller the screens (and the shorter the attention spans) that your readers have, the more you need to polish your writing style. This, sadly, is not happening. Even among my generation and older.
5) When work follows you everywhere
Everyone needs a break from being on-call. I know. When I was a kid, my uncle was a family doctor. Being accessible all the time can easily burn you out.
And yet people are afraid to disconnect from their work and social networks, even for eating, sleeping and having personal time. This just isn't right.
Because business is competitive, both client and agency people want to outdo each other in being available and responsive. If you don't answer this e-mail or take this call, right freaking NOW, then someone else will. Right?
Call me naive, but I think we need to change this situation. In my line of work, few crises are as immediate as people sometimes make them out to be. It's just that the opportunity for instant communication has created an expectation of immediate action — even on things that could easily have waited until tomorrow to address.
To me, the obsession with connectivity is a combination of novelty, inflated self-importance, and fear. We need to get over all three.
Anyway, if you'd like to comment on this blog, please do so below. I'll respond when I get around to it.
