The Importance of Enthusiasm In Any Prouct

A video took the web by storm today entitled “Incredible, amazing, awesome Apple.” Basically, it boils down Apple’s latest event into a series of superlatives. It’s a funny video because Apple really does have a pattern of using these types of words over and over again in its demonstrations. Cynics will say this is how Apple brainwashes the masses into buying their products, and gets people jazzed about the tiniest features. But I think there’s something much deeper here.

While certainly there is some element of hearing something so many times that you start to believe it, that’s nothing new, any good salesman will do the same thing. But why I think the tactic works so well with Apple is because they actually believe what they’re saying. Just watch Steve Jobs in that video. It sure seems like he’s damn sure that what he’s talking about is amazing. He’s excited about it. So is Phil Schiller and the others on the Apple team. And that excitement translates on a level unseen.

You’ve undoubtedly seen used car commercials where the used car salesman uses superlatives as well to the nth degree. But the difference is that he’s not genuine. Do you think he loves the junky cars he’s trying to pass off to you? No. Contrast that with Jobs. Do you believe that he loves the Apple products he’s trying to pass off to you? Yes.

This is hardly an Apple-only phenomenon. They’re just one of the best at translating their enthusiasm on a big stage several times a year thanks mainly to the charismatic Jobs. But really, I think you’ll find in most successful companies, the enthusiasm about their product is a key to how well that product is doing.

Another good example is Twitter. I’ve had to opportunity to meet a lot of Twitter employees over the past few years. One thing I noticed about each of them is their passion and excitement for what they’re doing. Certainly, if you look at it from the outside, the concept of Twitter was something that was just as likely to be a complete failure as it was a success. But the people running it and even the newest employees have a passion about it. When co-founder Biz Stone says he thinks Twitter can change the world, it may sound crazy, but it’s not, because he believes it.

Speaking of the newest employees, Twitter’s new COO, Dick Costolo, just started at the company recently. During TechCrunch50, he was asked on stage why he joined Twitter. After all, he had sold his previous company, FeedBurner, to Google for $100 million, and upon leaving Google, he probably never needed to work again. But his response is telling, “My first reaction was, you don’t get a chance to work on potentially one of the pivotal companies.”

He’s not going to work at Twitter for the paycheck, he’s going to work there because he believes in what they are doing. And that enthusiasm can only further the company.

This type of enthusiasm also seems to be prevalent at companies like Facebook, Netflix, and Zappos (which was of course recently acquired by Amazon). And not surprisingly, people seem to love working at those companies.

For a long time, Google was in that realm too. To some extent, it still is, but as it gets bigger and bigger, there seems to be no shortage of people who leave, discontent. Google is still making great products, but whenever you have talent leaving, for whatever reason, that’s not a great sign. Maybe Google can overcome that, but you simply can’t discount the recent talk about a possible Google decline.

Not to single out Yahoo, but they are one company where employee enthusiasm has seemed waning in recent years, to say the least. It’s hard to know if that started before or after the great products stopped and it fell into decline, but it’s a serious problem, nonetheless. That’s not to say no one is enthusiastic about being there, but I do get the feeling that plenty are there simply to get a paycheck. And a company will never win that way.

Microsoft is more of a mixed bag. There are plenty at the company who love it passionately. Most notable of these is of course, CEO Steve Ballmer. While I don’t believe he’s being disingenuous with his Microsoft zealotry, I know that his passion is not shared by everyone at the company. And I believe that translates one way or another to the public (be it by sub-par products, or other less tangible means). And to some extent, that may be why we don’t see the same type of “fanboy” fervor that a company like Apple gets.

But you’ll notice a common theme among the last three examples: They’re all huge companies. It’s undoubtedly very hard to keep everyone happy and on the same page about the products as you grow in size. That’s really why Steve Jobs is more important to Apple than doing any tangible work he may be doing. He is the glue that seems to make enthusiasm stick at the large company. When he wasn’t there in the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s, things went downhill, and undoubtedly the enthusiasm went downhill.

It was interesting talking to startups at TechCrunch50 this past week. A lot of them seemed to have the passion for what they were doing, and that was great to see. But I’m not sure that all of them did, and I have no doubt that those companies are going to be much more prone to failure.

My point is an obvious one, but I think it’s often overlooked. Enthusiasm and passion are so important, no matter what you do. If you don’t feel like you have that towards the company you are with, you should seriously consider leaving. Of course, there is something to be said about a paycheck, especially in tough economic times, but if you have the means and are simply spinning your wheels doing something that you don’t believe in, you’re really not helping anyone, and especially not yourself.

And you’re not helping us, the public, either, because if you’re not enthusiastic about something, we’re certainly not going to be.

Better yet, if you have the power in your company to start something that you are passionate about, do it. Even if it’s something that seems silly, like say, Twitter (which of course, started as a side project at Odeo), your enthusiasm about it just may push it through. And it may slowly bubble up into something bigger. And it may just blow up into the next big thing. Because enthusiasm translates.

The Crisis of Credit Visualized

The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.

Business Model Innovation

Mediaplaza event '08

View more presentations from Alexander Osterwalder. (tags: conference talks)

Business Model Example Series : Issue 2 / iPod

View more presentations from Alexander Osterwalder. (tags: by xplane)

Business Model Example Series : Issue 1

View more presentations from Alexander Osterwalder. (tags: models disruption)

Good PowerPoint Design - for business presenters

View more presentations from Alexander Osterwalder. (tags: rules" "design)

Don’t come to the table with the same tired arguments…

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT AT HOUSE DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS ISSUES CONFERENCEKingsmill Resort
Williamsburg, Virginia

8:28 P.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Thank you, Democrats. (Applause.) Thank you. Please, everybody have a seat. Everybody have a seat. It is great to be here with so many friends. Thank you for giving me a reason to use Air Force One. (Laughter.) It’s pretty nice. (Laughter.)

I’m glad to see the House Democratic Caucus is getting by just fine without my Chief of Staff. (Laughter.) I don’t know how many of you were at the Alfalfa dinner, but I pointed out, you know, this whole myth of Rahm being this tough guy, mean, is just not true. At least once a week he spends time teaching profanity to underprivileged children. (Laughter and applause.) So he’s got a soft spot.

I want to thank John Larson for inviting me here tonight. This is John’s first conference as Chairman of the Democratic Caucus, so we’re both new at this. John, congratulations. (Applause.)

I want to acknowledge the great Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. (Applause.) She is our rock who’s proven to be an extraordinary leader for the American people. And I want to thank Nancy and Steny Hoyer and Jim Clyburn, and the entire caucus — (applause) — Javier Becerra — all the leadership working so hard, all the chairmen like David Obey, who’ve worked so hard in passing an economic recovery plan that is so desperately needed for our country. (Applause.)

All of you acted with a discipline that matches the urgency and the gravity of the crisis that we face. Because you know what’s at stake. Every weekend you go home to your districts and you see factories that are closing and small businesses shutting their doors. You hear from families losing their homes; students that can’t pay their tuition; seniors who are worrying about whether they can retire with dignity, or see their kids and grandkids lead a better life.

So you went to work, and you did your job. For that, you have my appreciation and admiration. And more importantly, you’ve got the American people’s thanks, because they know it is time to get something done here in Washington. (Applause.)

As we meet here tonight, we know that there’s more work to be done. The Senate is still acting. And after it has its final vote, we still need to resolve differences between the House and Senate bills. So we’re going to still have to work, and I’m going to urge you to complete that work without delay. And I know that Nancy and Steny, all the rest of the leadership is committed to making that happen.

Now, I just want to say this — I value the constructive criticism and the healthy debate that’s taking place around this package, because that’s the essence, the foundation of American democracy. That’s how the founders set it up. They set it up to make big change hard. It wasn’t supposed to be easy. That’s part of the reason why we’ve got such a stable government, is because no one party, no one individual can simply dictate the terms of the debate. I don’t think any of us have cornered the market on wisdom, or that do I believe that good ideas are the province of any party. The American people know that our challenges are great. They’re not expecting Democratic solutions or Republican solutions — they want American solutions. And I’ve said that same thing to the public, and I’ve said that, in a gesture of friendship and goodwill, to those who have disagreed with me on aspects of this plan.

But what I have also said is — don’t come to the table with the same tired arguments and worn ideas that helped to create this crisis. (Applause.) You know, all of us here — imperfect. And everything we do and everything I do is subject to improvement. Michelle reminds me every day how imperfect I am. (Laughter.) So I welcome this debate. But come on, we’re not — we are not going to get relief by turning back to the very same policies that for the last eight years doubled the national debt and threw our economy into a tailspin. (Applause.)

We can’t embrace the losing formula that says only tax cuts will work for every problem we face; that ignores critical challenges like our addiction to foreign oil, or the soaring cost of health care, or falling schools and crumbling bridges and roads and levees. I don’t care whether you’re driving a hybrid or an SUV — if you’re headed for a cliff, you’ve got to change direction. (Applause.) That’s what the American people called for in November, and that’s what we intend to deliver. (Applause.)
So the American people are watching. They did not send us here to get bogged down with the same old delay, the same old distractions, the same talking points, the same cable chatter. (Applause.) You know, aren’t you all tired of that stuff?

AUDIENCE: Yes!

THE PRESIDENT: They did not vote for the false theories of the past, and they didn’t vote for phony arguments and petty politics. They didn’t vote for the status quo — they sent us here to bring change. We owe it to them to deliver. This is the moment for leadership that matches the great test of our times. And I know you want to work with me to get there. (Applause.)

If we do not move swiftly to sign the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act into law, an economy that is already in crisis will be faced with catastrophe. This is not my assessment. This is not Nancy Pelosi’s assessment. This is the assessment of the best economists in the country. This is the assessment of some of the former advisors of some of the same folks who are making these criticisms right now.

Millions more Americans will lose their jobs. Homes will be lost. Families will go without health care. Our crippling dependence on foreign oil will continue. That is the price of inaction.

This isn’t some abstract debate. Last week, we learned that many of America’s largest corporations already laid off thousands and are planning to lay off tens of thousands of more workers. Today, we learned that in the previous week, the number of new unemployment claims jumped to 626,000. Tomorrow, we’re expecting another dismal jobs report, on top of the half a million jobs that were lost last month, on top of the half a million jobs that were lost the month before that, on top of the 2.6 million jobs that were lost last year.

For you, these aren’t just statistics. This is not a game. This is not a contest for who’s in power and who’s up and who’s down. These are your constituents. These are families you know and you care about. I believe that it is important for us to set aside some of the gamesmanship in this town and get something done. (Applause.)

Now, I believe — I just want to repeat, because I don’t want any confusion here. I believe that legislation of this enormous magnitude, that by necessity we are moving quickly — we’re not moving quickly because we’re trying to jamb something down people’s throats. We’re moving quickly because we’re told that if we don’t move quickly, that the economy is going keep on getting worse, and we’ll have another 2 or 3 or 4 million jobs loss this year.

I’d love to be leisurely about this. My staff is worn out, working around the clock. So is David Obey’s staff. So is Nancy Pelosi’s staff. We’re not doing this because we think this is a lark. We’re doing this because people are counting on us. So legislation of this magnitude deserves the scrutiny that it’s received, and all of you will get another chance to vote for this bill in the days to come. But I urge all of us not to make the perfect the enemy of the absolutely necessary.

Understand the scale and the scope of this plan is right. And when you start hearing arguments on the cable chatter, just understand a couple of things. Number one, when they say, well, why are we spending $800 billion — we’ve got this huge deficit? First of all, I found this deficit when I showed up. (Applause.) Number one. (Applause.) I found this national debt doubled, wrapped in a big bow waiting for me as I stepped into the Oval Office.

Number two, it is expected that we are going to lose about a trillion dollars worth of demand this year, a trillion dollars of demand next year because of the contraction in the economy. So the reason that this has to be big is to try to fill some of that lost demand. And as it is, there are many who think that we should be doing even more. (Applause.) So we are taking prudent steps.

But you talk to Ted Strickland and what’s happening in Ohio, and you ask him whether they need some relief in terms of the unemployment insurance rates that are going sky-high, and him having to pick up all kinds of folks who are suddenly seeking food stamps who had been working all their lives — and he’ll tell you that this not something that we’re just doing to grow government. We’re doing this because this is what the best minds tell us needs to be done. That’s point number one.

Point number two: When they start talking about, well, we need more tax cuts — we started this package with a healthy amount of tax cuts in the mix, recognizing that some tax cuts can be very beneficial, particularly if they’re going to middle class and working families that will spend that money. (Applause.) That’s not me talking; that’s the economists talking, who insisted that they’re most likely to spend and get that money into circulation and stimulate the economy.

Now, in fact, when we announced the bill, you remember — this is only about, what, two weeks ago? When we announced the framework — and we were complimented by Republicans, saying, boy, this is a balanced package, we’re pleasantly surprised. And suddenly, what was a balanced package needs to be put out of balance? Don’t buy those arguments.

Then there’s the argument, well, this is full of pet projects. When was the last time that we saw a bill of this magnitude move out with no earmarks in it? Not one. (Applause.) And when you start asking, well, what is it exactly that is such a problem that you’re seeing, where’s all this waste and spending? Well, you know, you want to replace the federal fleet with hybrid cars. Well, why wouldn’t we want to do that? (Laughter.) That creates jobs for people who make those cars. It saves the federal government energy. It saves the taxpayers energy. (Applause.)

So then you get the argument, well, this is not a stimulus bill, this is a spending bill. What do you think a stimulus is? (Laughter and applause.) That’s the whole point. No, seriously. (Laughter.) That’s the point. (Applause.)

So — I mean, I get carried away. (Laughter.) We’ve got to leave some time for questions and answers. Here’s the point I’m making. This package is not going to be absolutely perfect, and you can nit and you can pick, and that’s the game we all play here. We know how to play that game. What I’m saying is, now we can’t afford to play that game. We’ve got to pull together.

There are going to be some things that don’t get included that each of us would like to see included. All of us are going to have to make some sacrifices. And we have to accommodate the interests of a range of people. And the House is going to have to work with the Senate. But let’s think big right now. Let’s not think small. Let’s not think narrowly.

Just as past generations of Americans have done in trying times, we can — and must — turn this moment of challenge into one of opportunity. The plan that you’ve passed has at its core a simple idea: Let’s put Americans to work doing the work that America needs done. (Applause.)

This plan will save or create over three million jobs — almost all of them in the private sector.

This plan will put people to work rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges; our dangerously deficient dams and levees.

This plan will put people to work modernizing our health care system. That doesn’t just save us billions of dollars, it saves countless lives, because we’ll reduce medical errors. (Applause.)

This plan will put people to work renovating more than 10,000 schools — (applause) — giving millions of children the chance to learn in 21st century classrooms, and libraries and labs — creating new scientists for a new future.

This plan will provide sensible tax relief for the struggling middle class, and unemployment insurance and continued health care coverage for those who’ve lost their jobs. And it will help prevent our states and local communities — it will help Governor Ritter and Governor Strickland not have to lay off firefighters and teachers and police. Because when they get laid off, not only do we lose services, but maybe they can’t make payments on their home. Maybe they get foreclosed on and the economy goes down further.

And finally, this plan will begin to end the tyranny of oil in our time — doubles our capacity to generate alternative sources of energy, like wind and solar and biofuels. And it does it in three years; saves taxpayers billions of dollars; makes federal buildings more efficient; saves the average working family hundreds of dollars on their energy bills. After decades of empty rhetoric, that’s the down payment that we need on energy independence.

You know, there’s a lot about running for President that is tough — especially I don’t miss sleeping in motels and hotels, and I don’t miss not being with my kids as much as I’d like. But the best thing about being a candidate — and all of you know this because those members of Congress who are here, you’ve run, you know what it’s like — you get to see the country. You get to know the character of the American people. Over the last two years, I visited almost all 50 states. I’ve got to admit, the one I missed was Alaska. (Laughter.) We’re going to get there. I’ve been in so many of your districts. I’ve passed through towns and cities farms and factories. And I know what you know — people are hurting. I’ve looked in their eyes. I’ve heard their stories. I’ve sensed their deep frustration.

And they’re just hoping that we’re working for them. They’re so strong and they’re so decent, the American people, and those struggles haven’t diminished that strength and that decency. We hold in our hands the capacity to do great things on their behalf. But we’re going to have to do it by not thinking about ourselves, not thinking about how does this position me, how am I looking. We’re going to have to just think about how are we delivering for them.

It starts with this economic recovery plan. And soon, we’ll take on the big issues like addressing the foreclosure problem, by passing a budget, tackling our fiscal problems, fixing our financial regulation, securing our country. And we won’t approach these challenges just as Democrats — because we remember the look in the eyes of our constituents. We know even though they’ve been cynical, that they’re thinking, maybe this time is going to be different. They know we’ve got to overcome all these problems as Americans. And that’s why we have to work in a serious, substantive, and civil way, and we will keep working to build bipartisan support for action.

I promise you that my door is always open, and my administration will consult closely with each and every one of you — the people’s representatives — as we take on these pressing priorities.

Already, you’ve made a difference. Nancy mentioned — I’m so proud of that day that we signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act — (applause) — to see Lilly Ledbetter on the stage, representing the American people, representing all the women out there who want their daughters to have the same opportunities as our sons. And then we signed Children’s Health Insurance to provide coverage for 11 million, and make a down payment on comprehensive health care reform. (Applause.)

And it wasn’t easy. You worked hard to make it happen, which means we can work hard to make sure that we’ve got jobs all across America, and energy independence all across America. And we will not stop until we deliver for our constituents. (Applause.)

That’s what the Democratic Party is all about. That’s what this caucus is all about. That’s what my presidency is all about. (Applause.)

Thank you, guys. I love you. (Applause.) Thank you. (Applause.)

END 8:50 P.M. EST

Will.I.Am's "Yes We Can"

What Marketers Can Learn From Obama's Campaign

Change -- and Positioning -- You Can Believe in

By Al Ries (Advertising Age)

Nov. 4, 2008, will go down in history as the biggest day ever in the history of marketing.

Take a relatively unknown man. Younger than all of his opponents. Black. With a bad-sounding name. Consider his first opponent: the best-known woman in America, connected to one of the most successful politicians in history. Then consider his second opponent: a well-known war hero with a long, distinguished record as a U.S. senator.

It didn't matter. Barack Obama had a better marketing strategy than either of them. "Change."

Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels was the master of the "big lie." According to Goebbels, "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

The opposite of that strategy is the "big truth." If you tell the truth often enough and keep repeating it, the truth gets bigger and bigger, creating an aura of legitimacy and authenticity.

Clinton's 'solutions' fizzle
What word did Hillary Clinton own? First she tried "experience." When she saw the progress Mr. Obama was making, she shifted to "Countdown to change." Then when the critics pointed out her me-too approach, she shifted to "Solutions for America."

What word is associated with Ms. Clinton today? I don't know, do you?

Then there's John McCain. An Oct. 26 cover story in The New York Times Magazine was titled "The Making (and Remaking and Remaking) of the Candidate." The visual listed some of the labels the candidate was associated with: "Conservative. Maverick. Hero. Straight talker. Commander. Bipartisan conciliator. Experienced leader. Patriot." Subhead: "When a Campaign Can't Settle on a Central Narrative, Does It Imperil Its Protagonist?"

Actually, Mr. McCain did settle on a slogan, "Country first," but it was way too late in the campaign and it was a slogan that had little relevance to the average voter.

Tactically, both Ms. Clinton and Mr. McCain focused their messages on "I can do change better than my opponent can do change."

"Better" never works in marketing. The only thing that works in marketing is "different." When you're different, you can pre-empt the concept in consumers' minds so your competitors can never take it away from you.

The ultimate slogan
Look at what "driving" has done for BMW. Are there vehicles that are more fun to drive than BMWs? Probably, but it doesn't matter. BMW has pre-empted the "driving" position in the mind.

The sad fact is that there are only a few dozen brands that own a word in the mind and most of them don't even use their words as slogans. Mercedes-Benz owns "prestige," but doesn't use the word as a slogan. Toyota owns "reliability," but doesn't use the word as a slogan. Coca-Cola owns "the real thing," but doesn't use the words as a slogan. Pepsi-Cola owns "Pepsi generation," but doesn't use the words as a slogan.

As a matter of fact, most brands follow the Pepsi pattern. Every time they get a new CMO or a new advertising agency, they change the slogan. Since 1975, BMW has used one slogan: "The ultimate driving machine." Since 1975, Pepsi-Cola has used these advertising slogans:

* 1975: "For those who think young."
* 1978: "Have a Pepsi day."
* 1980: "Catch that Pepsi spirit."
* 1982: "Pepsi's got your taste for life."
* 1983: "Pepsi now."
* 1984: "The choice of a new generation."
* 1989: "A generation ahead."
* 1990: "Pepsi: The choice of a new generation."
* 1992: "Gotta have it."
* 1993: "Be young. Have fun. Drink Pepsi."
* 1995: "Nothing else is a Pepsi."
* 2002: "Generation next."
* 2003: "Think young. Drink young."
* 2004: "It's the cola."

Thirty-three years ago when the "Ultimate driving machine" campaign started, BMW was the 11th-largest-selling European imported vehicle in the U.S. market. Today it's No. 1.

Thirty-three years ago, Pepsi-Cola was the No. 2-selling cola in the U.S. market. Today, many advertising slogans later, it's still No. 2.

The average Pepsi-Cola advertising slogan lasts just two years and two months. The average chief marketing officer lasts just two years and two months. The average corporate advertising campaign in BusinessWeek lasts just two years and six months.

The Obama campaign has a lot to teach the advertising community.

1. Simplicity
About 70% of the population thinks the country is going in the wrong direction, hence Obama's focus on the word "change." Why didn't talented politicians like Ms. Clinton and John Edwards consider using this concept?

Based on my experience, in the boardrooms of corporate America "change" is an idea that is too simple to sell. Corporate executives are looking for advertising concepts that are "clever." For all the money being spent, corporate executives want something they couldn't have thought of themselves. Hopefully, something exceedingly clever.

Here is a sampling of slogans from a recent issue of BusinessWeek:

* Chicago Graduate School of Business: "Triumph in your moment of truth."
* Darden School of Business: "High touch. High tone. High energy."
* Salesforce.com: "Your future is looking up."
* Zurich: "Because change happenz."
* CDW: "The right technology. Right away."
* Hitachi: "Inspire the next."
* NEC: "Empowered by innovation."
* Deutsche Bank: "A passion to perform."
* SKF: "The power of knowledge engineering."

Some of these slogans might be clever, some might be inspiring and some might be descriptive of the company's product line, but none will ever drive the company's business in the way that "change" drove the Obama campaign. They're not simple enough.

2. Consistency
What's wrong with 90% of all advertising? Companies try to "communicate" when they should be trying to "position."

Mr. Obama's objective was not to communicate the fact that he was an agent of change. In today's environment, every politician running for the country's highest office was presenting him or herself as an agent of change. What Mr. Obama actually did was to repeat the "change" message over and over again, so that potential voters identified Mr. Obama with the concept. In other words, he owns the "change" idea in voters' minds.

In today's overcommunicated society, it takes endless repetition to achieve this effect. For a typical consumer brand, that might mean years and years of advertising and hundreds of millions of dollars.

Most companies don't have the money, don't have the patience and don't have the vision to achieve what Mr. Obama did. They jerk from one message to another, hoping for a magic bullet that will energize their brands. That doesn't work today. That is especially ineffective for a politician because it creates an aura of vacillation and indecisiveness, fatal qualities for someone looking to move up the political ladder.

The only thing that works today is the BMW approach. Consistency, consistency, consistency -- over decades, if not longer.

But not with a dull slogan. Hitachi has been "inspiring the next" for as long as I can remember, but with little success.

Effective slogans needs to be simple and grounded in reality. What next has Hitachi ever inspired? Red ink, maybe. In the past 10 years, Hitachi has had sales of $786.9 billion and managed to lose $5.1 billion. When you put your corporate name on everything, as Hitachi does, it's difficult to make money because it's difficult to make the brand stand for anything.

3. Relevance
"If you're losing the battle, shift the battlefield" is an old military axiom that applies equally as well to marketing. By his relentless focus on change, Mr. Obama shifted the political battlefield. He forced his opponents to devote much of their campaign time discussing changes they proposed for the country. And how their changes would differ from the changes that he proposed.

All the talk about "change" distracted both Ms. Clinton and Mr. McCain from talking about their strengths: their track records, their experience and their relationships with world leaders.

As you probably know, Mr. Obama was selected as Advertising Age's Marketer of the Year by the executives attending the Association of National Advertisers' annual conference in Orlando last month. But one wonders if these CMOs are getting the message.

As one marketing executive said: "I look at it as something that we can all learn from as marketers. To see what he's done, to be able to create a social network and do it in a way where it's created the tools to let people get engaged very easily. It's very easy for people to participate."

Whatever happened to "change"?

Awesome viral videos campaign for Obama

Obama's Loss Traced To "Your Name"



Obama in 30 seconds



And the winner is...
"Obamacan"
by David Gaw & Lance Mungia (Monrovia, CA)



After 1100 entries and more than 5.5 million total votes cast, the results are in. From among 15 amazing finalists, a panel of top filmmakers, artists, musicians, and progressive heroes picked the winning ad, "Obamacan." Over 100,000 people have already seen it online, but we need your help to air "Obamacan" on TV.

"I Got a Crush...On Obama" By Obama Girl



MyBO Tutorial
Find out how you can use My.BarackObama tools to help elect Barack