jason clement

Hello. I am Jason Clement.

This is my website scrapbook.

Search

Additional pages

Find me on...

PCMag is trying to ignite a controversy about Twitter’s ‘dark pool’. I think it’s undeserved. For Twitter, the ‘dark pool’ is Twitter users who don’t tweet. And in Twitter’s case, a large dark pool is ok. Even if it is as large as 44% of your usage base. Here’s why:

Twitter is a real-time news delivery vehicle more than it is a social network. You don’t have to tweet to derive value from the platform in the way you have to interact and have mutual “friendships” on a platform like Facebook. Looking at “Activity” on a platform without looking at traffic levels is a meaningless. Visitors see ads whether they tweet or not, meaning they have value beyond the activity this article tries to quantify.

I’d challenge PCMag and the research company to look at more “broadcast-like” social platforms and not find the same data. YouTube comes to mind a great place to start. I’d venture to say that at least 44% of YouTube users don’t upload videos. And they seem to be doing ok…

scienceisbeauty:

One of the answers to the topic: Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain at Mathematics Stack Exchange.

I think if you look at this animation and think about it long enough, you’ll understand:

  • Why circles and right-angle triangles and angles are all related
  • Why sine is opposite over hypotenuse and so on
  • Why cosine is simply sine but offset by pi/2 radians

watched this video from vision with the kids yesterday and got to thinking…. skate vids like this from the 80s are great model for the branded content era of today. here’s how it worked then and should work now.

step 1. make something rad that captures the passions of your audience.

step 2: distribute through an underground network of “influencers” and super fans.

step 3: profit. and watch it still matter thirty years later.

 

I’m a newly minted head full of innovation. Have no idea how this happened.

Alone, unused and tucked into the corner of the room, this is the state of computers for most of the first ten seasons of the show: a shared resource used only occasionally as needed, turned off more often than not, and dotted with Post-It notes left for other users.

Computer history according to episodes of Law and Order 

well good branding. #london

i took the developers shooting today. everything was safe and fun but teguh needs to work a little more on his gun safety skills. 

Birthday wishes in Hollywood.

scale, ‘peeing in pools’ and the 99.9% “ignore” rate

While I was at OMMA Native, I was on a panel about getting scale for native ads. I enjoyed the discussion and I think we had a conversation that the industry needs to have and debate. Specifically, we talked a lot about ad technology companies wanting to create “scale” in native advertising and content formats. I thought I’d share a bit here about that conversation and expand on some of my thoughts.

I love scale. I love it when our industry makes things that move people around the world. But when ad platform technologies start talking “scale”, I get nervous. I get nervous about standardization in the name of scale. I get nervous about things becoming “lowest-common denominator” in the name of scale.

Let me explain…

I come from the dawn of the internet and its early marketing efforts. I watched banners become “a thing” and then quickly, “meh”. “Scale”-chasing is what we did with online display. “Scale” gave us standard formats. Networks told us to pepper ads everywhere in the name of “scale”. That “scale” was a driving factor in making 99.9% of us ignore online display units today. Even “social” efforts have been hurt by scale. Engagement rates on Facebook brand pages is starting to look worse than display ads.

The point is, by putting ads everywhere for “scale”, you are driving down the “click rate” by increasing the “see” rate. When you do that, you “pee in the pool” for everyone. I did, in fact, use that euphemism while on that panel. Sorry Mom. 

For “native advertising” and the other new types of possibilities brands have to reach people, let’s make sure we focus on the end outcomes for the businesses and not scale. 

And as far as indicting a “young media buyer” who values scale, I sorta said that. It’s not meant to be a sweeping indictment of media people. It’s an indictment of how we all can sometime overvalue reach and “scale” over results in advertising.

We can easily make new technology that makes things “scale”. It’ll be harder and more expensive to make the custom, individual, hand-crafted things that people will actually love instead of ignore. It’s also more fun. When we chose the easy way, we might end up with 99.9% of people ignoring us. 

Loading posts...