Jaffe Juice

Discountinue (no, this is not a typo)

Well actually it was originally a typo but then Yogi Berra style, it made complete sense.

Let me explain...

A week ago, we had an offsite at Evol8tion. Actually it was an offsite follow up to our previous offsite...so kind of like off-off-Broadway if you follow me.

One of the action items on the agenda was to review our latest iteration of what we call a cost-benefit evaluation for pilot programs. Over the last 5 years, we've conducted over 60 pilot programs with early stage startups and/or emerging technology platforms on behalf of our clients and without exception, it always comes back to one question: how do we know if we were successful?

In other words, an output (the world of test 'n learns with its partner in crime: hard measurement KPI's) versus an outcome (behavior change, change management, learnings, moving at the speed of startup etc).

So we developed a simple template to help our clients evaluate whether their experiments were 1) BIG L'S, 2) small l's, 3) small w's or 4) BIG W'S.

Today I'll focus on the 1st item: The Big L or BIG LOSS. The F word....FAILURE.

I won't bore you with the conditions, questions, criteria or checklist we use to determine one from the other (and besides, that's part of our secret sauce), but sufficed to say one thing rings true every time: how do we - corporations/big business/multinationals/blue chip brands - become more comfortable with not being perfect. In other words, failing!

Startups are all too used to failing. And when they do, they fail fast. And they learn fast. They adapt. They come back stronger than ever before. They pivot. 

Brands...not so much.

Failure is never really failure when it's a means to an end. And that is really commensurate with the strategic recommendation that comes from a "BIG L" or failure, namely to discontinue.

You tried it out. It didn't work for you - your brand, your Business Unit, even your company. Perhaps the startup in question was just the wrong partner. Or perhaps you were. Perhaps your vertical just isn't suited for this approach. Or perhaps the specific emerging technology just isn't a good fit.

So you discontinue. You live to fight another day. And you do it with your head held high. With dignity. Respect. And most importantly, budget. You never bet the farm. You didn't put all your eggs in one basket. You never got burnt. And hopefully you did this way ahead of your fiercest rival or competitor.

Wait, that doesn't sound like a loss at all, does it?

This is the "discount" you receive for moving quickly, test and learning...to fail fast and more importantly, fail smart.

Whereas the premium you are used to paying ("Advertising the premium you pay for being unremarkable" - Seth Godin) is essentially an opportunity cost with a tight and shrinking budget and an opportunity lost in terms of sticking to the status quo; rapid prototyping, experimentation in digital innovation and ultimately well structured and calculated risk taking is a an opportunity gained where even the worst case scenario (the big "L") has a remarkable silver lining.

Innovation is quite binary if you think about it: either stuff works or it doesn't. And when it does, you "rinse and repeat" or "scale with success". And when it doesn't you "pivot" or "discontinue" - I mean, "discountinue."

And so the next time, you stick your neck out and don't exactly come out on top, instead of waiting for the guillotine to fall, pat yourself on the back for having taken another step towards a future which is a little less uncertain, scary and unknown.

In a world where the only constant is change, doesn't it make sense to invest in the future at a discount?

Related articles

Geek Squad Founder Revolutionized Tech Support with $200 and a Bicycle

Seth Godin's Wizardry Explained ... by Seth - Leading Questions

The biggest mistake in marketing (according to Seth Godin)

Imitation is the Sincerest Form of Flatulentry (Instagram copies Snapchat)

As the saying goes, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. In the innovation space, that's not always the case...unless of course you're operating in China, where there is no such thing as a barrier to entry

As an entrepreneur, it's a tough game to be able to differentiate and ultimately own a piece of IP, process, algorithm or approach. For starters, it costs a lot of money and deep pockets in terms of resources. Keeping one's hand close to one's chest doesn't work either, where VC's just won't sign NDA's to the extent you would like them to. Founders are often between a rock and a hard place when it comes to putting their ideas "out there" and hoping (even praying) no one steals them.

Then there is Instagram (owned by Facebook) that recently blatantly copied Snapchat with the introduction of Instagram Stories.

I guess I should be grateful, because for the life of me, I just don't get Snapchat or Snapchat Stories. So this gave me an opportunity to get on the Story bandwagon.

It has taken me a while to "find my authentic voice" and I'm still not sure I'm there yet. I'm using it to say "Good morning!" which often entails a snap of the Metro North. Or clips from a training run as part of my journey to run the New York Marathon for a second time. This past weekend, I had a few clips from my day @ Yankee Stadium watching NYCFC beat LA Galaxy 1-0.

I'm enjoying doodling on my photos and videos too.

In general, I'm getting about 100-120 "views" of my story every 24 hours before it disappears into the ether.

I see the usual early adopters and influencers getting on the bandwagon too (David Armano, CC Chapman, iJustine)

When I see kids (as opposed to overgrown children) on it, they're generally just telling people to add them on Snapchat, which seems like a giant "Up Yours!"

So that's what I'm seeing. Here's what I'm NOT seeing: as many actual Instagram updates as before...

In other words, I'm wondering whether this is actually having an adverse effect on Instagram's core product and equity; cannibalizing the very value proposition that catapulted Instagram into our lives, namely giving amateur humans with average cameras on their smartphone the ability to create extraordinary photos with filters and apps.

Look, if there's one thing I've learned in this space is that you don't write off the 800-pound gorillas. Well, that and the fact Woolly Mammoths no longer exist AKA the bigger they come, the harder they fall (see: Twitter) Our default emotion is normally set to "rage" when it comes to backlash against any decision taken by the main tech players when they DARE to change even the most teeniest tiniest detail of their FREE UI, dashboard, design, button and/or functionality...and this rage typically subsides after a while.

So in other words, while it's probably foolish to short your Facebook stock on the singular condition of Instagram copying Snapchat, I also would pause for a moment to consider why Instagram felt it necessary to have to dilute, devalue and possibly downgrade their core offering and cash cow in the process.

Perhaps the big winner is Snapchat as they are further validated as the authentic and de facto platform of the younger Millennial/Gen Z'er, who would much rather post disposable snaps of themselves puking out rainbows than worry about tilt shift, early bird or sharpen.

PS I am enjoying Instagram founder, @kevin's story of his bike ride through France though :)

Captain, The Holodeck is ready for you (AKA Has Virtual Reality hit its Tipping Point?)

Warp speed and Teleportation  may not quite be ready for Prime Time (or the Prime Directive), but the Holodeck appears to be gearing up for launch.

Last week, Evol8tion took one of our clients on a curated 2-day tour in Los Angeles of the Virtual Reality (VR) space. During this window, we visited various studio, tech companies and startups that are currently innovating from the front-lines and "imagineering" the future of VR.

1. So does VR "change everything"?
2. Will the VR industry ever get ahead of the perceived number 1 challenge of having to put on a headset (see: 3DTV)?
3. How is this different to the failed attempts of the past (see: Second Life)?

Are any of these questions actually relevant?

My belief has always been: if you want to understand technology, you have to experience it yourself. You simply have to roll up your sleeves and get your hands dirty. You can't read about it in a book. You can't trust your agents or agency to deliver an informed "POV" (unless of course they are bona fide subject matter experts.)

So unless you've tested out the technology and applications yourself (and no, a quick demo at SxSW does not really count), you really need to park your opinion at the door of ignorance before opening your giant yap and passing any premature judgement.

When you look at progress and in particular with innovation itself, it's important to recognize the "failed attempts of the past" all played a part in paving the way for their successors. Timing and luck are both important contributors and factors in combining to deliver an idea that sticks or tips. In other words, Pokeman Go has Minecraft to thank, which in turn has Second Life to thank for doing the thankless job of pioneering.

(not your problem I know, but still...)

As for the headsets, I don't think it's a stretch to imagine a time where they don't exist or if they do, they are no more intrusive (culturally, socially, behaviorally)  than reading or sunglasses. I'm actually not sure this is even a "thing" to be concerned about as a barrier to entry.

It might even be a necessary precursor to fool your brain into accepting you're somewhere else, which is a primary characteristic of the space.

In any event, Google Cardboard and the equivalent sells for around $10-15 on Amazon.com

For what it's worth, it's pretty insane to think of the sum total of the progress to date in a VERY well funded space as a hodgepodge of duct tape and chicken wire via cobbled together Samsung phones that snap into headsets or modified or hacked cameras that look like Battlebots and Go Pro had an unholy union...

We are literally at the infancy or dawn of a new era...

The transformative or perhaps a better word is transcendent experience that comes from stepping into a Futuristic kitchen (Job Simulator on HTC Vive), avoiding a Blue Whale under the sea, standing next to American Ninja Warrior's Vertical Wall or hanging out in a Tibetan hut is worth it.

These were some of my more memorable VR experiences. Oh, and also being teased by Nina Agdal as part of SI's Swimsuit VR Edition which was - ahem - fairly interesting (note to self: do not watch this EVER in front of other people, especially clients!)

I also enjoyed whizzing around a track with a fan blowing air into my face to simulate the whoosh of being in a racing car.

The list goes on. And that's the point.

Each time you experience a different interpretation or application of a narrative, evolved and adapted to an immersive and pervasive presence, it opens a multitude of possibilities for new use cases.

In some cases - such as travel & tourism - I would be as bold as to say that they should cut their entire advertising budget in favor of VR. I'm not exaggerating here. Hey, I did write "Life after the 30-second spot" and Z.E.R.O. Paid Media as the New Marketing Model after all.

In other cases, such as Consumer Packaged Goods, it's a little more challenging. I said, challenging; NOT Impossible.

And if all else fails, you can always resort to brilliant creative such as this one:

..or this one

I heard a great quote from the tour that sums up the world we came form versus the one we are heading towards: Create the Experience or Experience the Creative. It's not an either/or, but in fact an "AND" - so why wouldn't you proactively do both?

Perhaps this is why Robert Scoble jumped ship from reality to virtual reality.

Perhaps this is why Google has a Global Evangelist for VR

Perhaps this is why LA is a VR hotbed of growth and investment?

If you are wondering what all the fuss is about, perhaps you should take a tour (virtual or otherwise) to experience this phenomenon first hand and decide for yourselves if this is hype or hope? Perhaps you'll want to take a voyeuristic route and watch from the sidelines, which ironically is kind of the VR point, but not especially beneficial in terms of first mover or competitive advantage.

Every journey begins with a step and now you can take that giant leap for marketingkind. No really, you can actually step on the moon! Or climb Everest!

Whatever you do, I would caution against ignoring VR. You do so at your peril. I would recommend you frame your perspective against a blue ocean of possibilities versus searching for research or best practices. In a world of test 'n learns, it's time to focus on the learn part.

Sure you might have bigger fish to fry, so don't bet the farm unnecessarily on VR (especially if you're in the toilet paper business). For everyone else, there is a pretty robust and fertile sandbox to dream...or even daydream. 

VR is not the next big thing. It's an evolution of the last big thing. And that is in of itself, not a small thing.

Why I Am (Probably) Coming Back to SXSW Interactive Next Year

Jason Schlossberg wrote an opinion piece in Ad Age last week, titled, "Why I am (Probably) Not Coming Back to SxSW Interactive Next Year." 

The sub-head was "Four Reasons Why Discovering Something New is Getting Harder at Event." and they were:

1. The biggest technological innovations right now are invisible.
2. It doesn't seem like anyone waits to launch things at SXSW anymore.
3. This year it is all about ed and med (and robots).
4. "Innovation" is everyone's business today -- or is it?

He ends with the following paragraph:

So is it still worth attending SXSW Interactive? If you've never been, then I say yes. But if you already have then I say, maybe. It's simply no longer the requirement that it once was. I'm not sure that I am leaving any more informed or inspired than I would be reading about it from afar. Having said all of that, I still had a great time. I met and reconnected with many good friends and colleagues -- most of whom, ironically, live in New York City like I do. And Austin is itself an extremely inspiring place to visit. But I (probably) won't be back next year.

So kudos to him for a) getting my attention, b) being smart about covering his a$$ with the word (probably) #fomo and c) getting his piece published in Ad Age.

Personally I disagree with him. Respectfully of course.

To address his points:

1. Not always. I met the founder of Kapture who gave me his wearable device that allows me to go back in time 60 seconds at a time. I'm not joking.
2. Tell that to Mr Robot who launched last year and followed it up with an even bigger activation this year. Mr Robot has had an incredible award-winning and ratings-winning year
3. ...and VR (and robots or Mr Robot)
4. It should be, but the reality is that it's the first budget to get cut and the level of innovation at companies is still abysmal

...and to his concluding paragraph, I actually think it's a lot harder for virgins than grizzled old timers. First timers tend to get overwhelmed with the tyranny of too much choice. They cram too much into a day, spend too much money with third party vendors that "program" their itineraries to a fault where serendipity and chance are pretty much eradicated, are disappointed when they are turned away from sessions that are too full, spend too much time waiting in lines and haven't discovered "The Onion" yet.

I went solo this year and never found myself wanting for a second to find stimulating conversation from random people I bumped into, mutual admirers I finally met like Mark Schaefer or old friends I reconnected with like C.C. Chapman.

I went determined to be positive at all times and my litmus test was to have 1 quality conversation with 1 quality person at every venue. Like George Costanza (in the Seinfeld episode where he cracks a joke in the meeting and when everyone roars with laughter he ups and leaves on a high), when that happened I would leave and go to the next soiree (even if I had been there for less than 30 minutes).

Jason is right...you do tend to connect with people who are a stone's throw away in the very city you live or work, but sometimes it takes getting out of the madness and chaos to find the time to have genuine conversations, like my breakfast with R/GA on Sunday morning for example.

So what was "the next big thing" at SxSW this year? From what I heard, it was Snapchat as a messaging platform. I missed that memo. Perhaps it was the fact my cellphone worked so well (and the connection problems from previous years was just a thing of the past). I also discovered "Low Power Mode" on my iPhone which is my new favorite function...that and "Night Shift" (but you can't use them together).

Actually, my big takeaway this year was one word: TALENT. I was blown away by how many BIG companies (from blue chip brands to agencies or management consultancies) set up their lavish activations with a primary goal of using it as a recruitment tool (and I suppose retention as well). Makes total sense when you think of the tech savvy, influencers and Millennial talent "on show".

On the flipside, I continue to be appalled by the LACK of vision from the same Fortune 500 brands and service companies who DO NOT invest in sending their people to SxSW. You would be shocked at how many people were NOT there because their companies wouldn't pay for it, or worse still...they were there ON THEIR OWN DIME.

I don't believe SxSW has jumped the shark...well, not any more or less than in every previous year that I've been going down to Austin. SxSW is what you make of it and what you put in is almost always what you get out. 

I had moments of serendipity like sitting next to Bryan Bundesen, the founder of legendary Grumpy Cat, two years running on the plane coming into Austin and he kindly gave me ride into town or seeing an ignorant bouncer refuse VIP entry to Steve Case at a startup event (oops). Or blowing off MDC and IAB's brunches in favor of watching Spurs beat Aston Villa at NBC Sports Experience at the Four Seasons. Come on you Spurs!

I'm probably with Jason that I didn't necessarily learn anything new this year, but then again I never do. Rather, I get inspired by networking with amazing, diverse, talented and visionary people. Some of it sticks. Some of it disappears into the Red Bull and Vodka void of too many late night cocktails...but I always emerge just a little excited about the possibilities that lie ahead.

And for that, I (probably) will be back next year.

P.S. Jason, we should connect as we're both in NYC. Or better yet, let's meet in Austin next year :)

Donald J. Trump is the Ultimate Z.E.R.O. Marketing Case Study

In Flip the Funnel, I outlined Obama '08 as one of the best in class case studies exemplifying what it is to deploy a "retention as the new acquisition" inside-out approach to marketing. Little did I know, I would be turning to politics once again to demonstrate and validate my* 4th book, "Z.E.R.O."

Donald J. Trump - hate him or love him - and I will keep my personal opinion separate to this piece (you just need to visit my Facebook page to see what I really think) has shown without much wiggle room or doubt the power of "Z.E.R.O. Paid Media as the New Marketing Model".

Before I continue, let me just state a point which I think is clear and obvious: Have any doubt in the assertion that Paid Media is on the precipitous decline - or just plain doesn't work - why not look towards the political process itself? Think about a race where both candidates are spending obscene amount on paid media. One is going to to win and one is going to lose. And so if you're going to point to the efficacy of paid media in helping one candidate declare victory, then surely you need to declare paid media as being completely ineffective and wasteful in the loser's failed quest...

Oh I know where you're about to head...you're going to blame the "message" vs the "medium" Stupid creative! Be more persuasive next time (to the tune of Homer Simpson)!

Still fighting me? Of course you are...you're going to blame the "product" versus the advertising and possibly cite that ridiculous and pathetic excuse, "there's no better way to kill a bad product than with great advertising."

Hey, I'm just demonstrating that paid media is not the panacea it once was. Don't shoot the messenger (regardless of your position on the second amendment) 

Hang on, you're still protesting that the political bubble is unique and is not representative of the real world. You're right...it's much simpler than the cluttered, noising SKU-infested REAL world of toothpaste, detergent, cellular providers, cars and home mortgages where the tyranny of choice makes life damn near impossible for you.

...and now we return you to our regularly schedule program, the reality show that is Donald J Drumpf.

The Donald might as well be called "The Dude" when it comes to playing the system; the media; and well, playing you as well with a simple spin on "Sticks and stones make break my bones, but words will never harm me." 

As a conspiracy theory aside, I've wondered whether he was always trying to pull of a Verbal on us by pulling off the greatest MEDIA con in the history of the business...using the MEDIA as the perfect conduit and weapon of mass distraction. I always felt there was going to be an A-HA reveal; a gotcha....but it never came. The Jimmy Kimmel skit with Producers' Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick was not far off. 

Perhaps Trump was looking to further his brand, which he currently values at $3bn! 

...and then, when the media, together with the gullible, desperate and/or dumb populous lapped up the rhetoric and did not immediately reject and regurgitate it in disgust, something weird happened: he either started to believe his own lies (a common side effect of narcissism) or unequivocably did not and instead doubled-, tripled- and quadrupled-down on nonsense in an attempt to shock the body to reject its host.

Think about it: xenophobia, bigotry, veiled threats of murder, racism and EVEN TAKING ON THE POPE!!!! Nothing seems to work (and here I type this on Super Tuesday...gee, I wonder how today is going to go No surprise, he did pretty well.)

Personally, I think - I KNOW - that should he be offered "The final rose", he will break our hearts by telling us he is not in love with us...but in fact with someone else (HIMSELF) and reject our proposal. 

So what does this have to do with Zero Paid Media as the New Marketing Model? Besides, everything???

• Z.E.R.O. states that in a perfect world, the optimal paid media budget would be zero.
• Why would you need to pay for attention if you're paying attention?
• Why be a tenant (renting media) when you can be a landlord (owning and monetizing assets)?

...oh and Trump knows a thing or two about being a landlord for what it's worth.

Z.E.R.O. is also an acronym for Zealots, Entrepreneurship, Retention and Owned Assets and Trump comes up "trumps" in the Zealots (can you say Trumpets?), Entrepreneurship (the American dream is not to make it...not make it great...again) and Owned Assets categories.

The earned media he's received is beyond compare. It's priceless. This is content strategy at its best. Or worst. Or best.

Whilst I still don't think he is going to become President, it doesn't really matter at this stage. He has proven that "telling it like it is" is less about telling the truth and more about being a mirror or lens reflecting what - some - people are really thinking. And isn't that what a brand is at the end of the day? Nothing more than a mirror or reflection of a company's values, beliefs, and principles and a projection or connection to the people it hopes to serve, service or sell to?

This might be a good time to purchase a copy of Z.E.R.O. - it's purchase price is less than the average contribution to Bernie Sanders and 100% of the proceeds is going to go towards burying the asbestos-laded "Make America Great Again" caps (well then ones that don't go to the Smithsonian)

...but in all seriousness, Donald J Trump has shown - beyond the shadow of a doubt - that power of Advocacy multiplied to the power of the ultimate asset, one's mouth.

He's right you know: we wouldn't be talking about this stuff without him. You know, like racism. Real racism...not like #oscarssowhite. And I'm as guilty as the next. I still have 9 unplayed episodes of Homeland to watch...can't get to them as I'm watching the new reality show hit; the new must-see TV, CNN.

I leave you with the words of CBS head honcho, Les Moonves: It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS. 

Yes, the media could just stop reporting on this. Yes we could just stop watching, but we can't. Forget "Yes, we can"; the new normal, is "No, we can't!" (stop watching)

We're all disciplies of the Church of Z.E.R.O.

Amen. Hallelujah!

P.S.. Thank you Drumpf for curing my writer's block!

Photo credit: Designcrowd.com

* actually our as in co-authored by my ex-client and current-friend, Maarten Albarda

Jaffe Juice #181 - Up Periscope with Jaffe and Joel

My brother-from-another-mother, Mitch Joel (a 2-time best-selling author with 6 Pixels of Separation and Ctrl-Alt-Delete, as well as a successful entrepreneur, having recently sold his agency, Twist Image to WPP) get together once a month to do a healthy debate about the state of the agency business, creativity, innovation or whatever is on our mind. We put this out on our respective podcasts (Jaffe Juice and 6 Pixels of Separation.)

In this episode we discuss live and streaming (they are not the same thing), the rise of Periscope (and fall of Meerkat) and a few zings on pundits and punditry to boot.

Give it a listen by downloading or listening here. Or you can subscribe to the show here.

The Agency is Dead. Long live the Agency!

My brother-from-another-mother, Mitch Joel (a 2-time best-selling author with 6 Pixels of Separation and Ctrl-Alt-Delete, as well as a successful entrepreneur, having recently sold his agency, Twist Image to WPP) get together once a month to do a healthy debate about the state of the agency business, creativity, innovation or whatever is on our mind. We put this out on our respective podcasts (Jaffe Juice and 6 Pixels of Separation.)

We are now bringing this to life...by pitching a live panel at next year's SxSW Interactive Festival in Austin, Texas...and we need to rock the vote! 

Here's Mitch's blog post, which is so perfect I have essentially cut and pasted the whole damn thing :)

How will agencies attract and retain talent, when so many young marketing professionals are working for major brands, startups or companies like Snapchat?

It's time to debate, resolve and figure out the future of the agency model. Are you with me? Are you ready for a heated conversation? The venue has already been determined, but an event of this magnitude will not happen without your vote! We are hoping to make this happen at South by Southwest 2016... but it can't happen WITHOUT YOUR VOTE! 

Here's the set-up/context:  

Do you believe that if David Ogilvy or Bill Bernbach were alive today that they would be quaking in their boots? Right now, they're probably rolling around in their graves at the current reality. Is it possible that their beloved agencies could very well be a thing of the past? The world has changed so much. Today, Cannes Lions is run - not by creatives - but by the Facebooks, Twitters and Googles of the world. Can agencies survive this perfect storm? Will they prove to be the consummate cockroaches, and adapt... or will they die a slow and painful death (and will anyone notice or care)? Jaffe and I will argue the pros and the cons, and make the case as to the rise, fall and possibly even the resurrection of the endangered species known as "The Agency." We may even add some very special guests to this lively conversation.

Will you help us out and vote for this event to take place?

Joel and I will also answer the following questions:

1. How will agencies win the talent wars, when so many young stars are joining startups, tech companies, publishers or going to work directly for brands? 
2. What will agencies need to do to survive, as it relates to investing in technology, doing startup collaborations and/or seeking out new revenue streams? 
3. What's the best way to connect and build relationships with agencies (as a startup, vendor, tech provider), or is it better to go direct to the client?
4. What are the forces at play that are working against the agency model?
5. Which agencies have done the hard work of future-proofing their business models?
6. How will the major advertising and communications networks adapt?

Now, it's your turn.

Will you please support this panel by heading over to the SXW panel picker and voting for it (you will need to register regardless if you are planning on attending the event or not)?

I will also ask that you share this out with your network as well. There are also direct Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn buttons on the panel page.

Mitch and I know that this will be an exciting event, so we are very hopeful that you will play a small role in making it happen, by voting for us and sharing it with your community.

• We will be looking to add in a few surprises / easter eggs into the panel i.e. surprise guests.
• In addition we are thinking about a meet-up/event later that night so we can continue the conversation post-panel.
• Even if you can't make, we'll make sure there is a streaming solution so you can "beam in"

Let's make this happen!

2 episodes of Jaffe Juice - The New Marketing Podcast on Tech, Talent and Creativity

Hello strangers...

How about 2 episodes of Jaffe Juice - The New Marketing Podcast for the price of Z.E.R.O.? No actually, zero.

Plus you get Mirum's Mitch Joel as value add.

The first episode is #179 where we discuss the Wall Street Journal article, Tech Firms Pull Talent Away From Ad Agencies. 

You can listen live by left clicking or download by right clicking here

The second episode is #180 where we do an armchair quarterback deconstruction, unpacking, post-mortem of Cannes 2016. And yes, there is some bitterness, jealousy, cynicism and good old fashioned ranting as well. 

You can listen live by left clicking or download by right clicking here

Image credit 

3 doses of Jaffe Juice: on Millennials, Visual Story Telling and Word of Mouth

I know I have been long remiss in updating the podcast. So much so that Apple has removed "Across the Sound" from iTunes (ugggh) and I'm now trying to get the feed back up and running.

In the interim, you certainly can download it / listen to it via the Jaffe Juice blog and newsletter, as well as subscribing to the Jaffe Juice feed, which will give you an aggregation of blog posts, audio podcasts and Jaffe Juice TV video content.

So here are the 3 most recent:

Jaffe Juice #176 - Mitch Joel and I discuss Millennials

Photo credit

Jaffe Juice #177 - Book interview with author of The Power of Visual Storytelling, Ekaterina Walter

Buy the book here

Also co-authored with Jessica Gioglio

Jaffe Juice #178 - Book interview with author of fizz, Ted Wright

Buy the book here

JJTV #143 - The Engaged Leader with Charlene Li

Last month, I sat down with Altimeter's Charlene Li to discuss her new book, "The Engaged Leader." This is Charlene's third book and you may recall her first book, best-selling Groundswell.

Charlene is gracious, giving, smart, insightful and really understands the depth behind the superficiality of social media.

Hope you like the conversation and don't forget to buy her book. 

Related articles

Altimeter CEO Charlene Li's Book: "The Engaged Leader: A Strategy For Your Digital Transformation"

Charlene Li Wants to Help Leaders Be More Open [VIDEO]

Charlene Li's 'The Engaged Leader' Tells Executives How To Lead Without Fearing Social Technology

How Engaged Leaders Use Mobility To Build Brands & Businesses