Topics for the 8/30/09 Show

Here are the proposed topics for this week's episode of The BeanCast, and as usual we'd love to hear your thoughts and questions.

You have two ways to get in touch: 1) Send an "@" reply or DM on Twitter to @thebeancast, or 2) send an email to beancast@gmail.com

Please keep your comments succinct. Wordy comments need to be interpreted and I may not capture the essence of what you are asking. That's why I encourage the Tweet option to help keep the question or thought targeted.

This week's panel will be David Burn (AdPulp), Dan Goldgeier (AdPulp) and Bill Green (Make the Logo Bigger).

TOPICS

From Interns to Crowds: CP+B caught a lot of heat this week for crowdsourcing a logo design with Crowdspring after intern-winning client, Brammo, didn't like its logo design. First, what's wrong with crowdsourcing design? Aren't there certain applications where it can be warranted? What do we think of services like Crowdspring? Is crowdsourcing simply part of the future, like Edward Boches seems to believe in his recent 4As video? Is there a line that's crossed in crowdsourcing when we go from idea generation to actually doing the work? Ben Kunz wrote about Crowdspring several weeks back and coined the term "viralsourcing" as a better description, where the process itself becomes part of the campaign and can go viral -- is there any advantage to thinking of this process in such a light? Can/should the process of creativity itself be part of the promotion? Is there any advantage to the client in doing this or does it expose the client to too much risk? Is exposing the creative process more about agency self-promotion? What about this specific situation -- is CP+B really wrong for crowdsourcing given the circumstances? The client was the winner of stupid promotions that sold the interns for charity purposes for $17K. Can the client really expect to get the A-list now? Was the whole idea flawed from the beginning? Is CP+B getting a raw deal from the Designis.ms protest? Given the circumstances, wasn't this probably the only time where they could have got away testing a service like this?

Forgetting What Wins: President Obama and his Healthcare reform took a lot of heat from the marketing press this week. Ken Wheaton had a particular scathing piece in Ad Age saying many of the things I've been saying myself in various posts online -- too much "sell," not enough "social," no focus, no USP, no actual concrete bill, empty use of the word "reform." Is the Obama causing much of it's own trouble by forgetting the lessons of consensus building they learned in the election? Where are they going most wrong on selling the Healthcare reform package? Is it the right strategy to engage the right? Don't the Democrats own Washington? Couldn't they get this passed tomorrow if their own party was in agreement? What about the charge of spamming supporters? Are they assuming too much "trust" in the relationship with people who simply express interest? What do these moves convey about brand Obama and how is it helping/hurting the administration?

Someone Said, "Recovery?": WPP announces a 47% drop. Kellogg's looks to cut agency partners from 30 to 5. First, what's going on with WPP? Why such dismal results for the largest network? Can it all be attributed to the economy or is something more nefarious going on? What about the Kellogg's news? Is this economic or just a strategic move on the part of the brand? Are we swinging the pendulum yet again? Are big, vertically focused holding companies coming in vogue again, after flirtations with having a wide variety of agency partners? If so, why is WPP still suffering?

Anything for a Buck: The news had a few stories this week about how publishers are exploring their alternative revenue streams and there are some interesting initiatives. Why is the Conde Nast/Boxee partnership important? Boxee is still a niche player with a product in Alpha -- why would CN do a deal with them? What future are they looking toward? What about some of the interesting plays by magazines? Are there any stand out initiatives? While ads still play a big part, a lot of publishers are looking at book revenue? Isn't this another area prone to danger? Event marketing was a surprising one, with things like Maker Faire by Make magazine...a digital and viral event. Isn't this too close to another danger industry: tradeshows? All seem to be exploring some form of video content revenue. Does the successful magazine publisher of the future need to be a multimedia company?

And the Bad Photoshop Award Goes To...: Microsoft caught a lot of heat for take a multicultural image on the US site and photoshopping a white man's face on a black man's body for the Polish version of the site. And didn't change the hands. Ooops! Is this just part of the danger of having a global operation? Can we blame Microsoft for missing what was obviously work by a rogue art partner? What can other multinational brands learn from this?