geschreven om te lezen » Uncategorized

→ What We Really Know About Consumer Behavior – John Deighton

Jan Seurinck — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 19:27:55 +0000

(…) marketing’s future, like its past, is shaped by the enduring realities of how people think, perceive, feel, decide, and act.

Spot on.

Permalink

★ Benieuwd wat dat straks geeft met al die flikken op twitter en andere sociale dinges….

Jan Seurinck — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:12:38 +0000

Benieuwd wat dat straks geeft met al die flikken op twitter en andere sociale dinges. Het onveiligheidsgevoel bij de hoger opgeleiden zal er niet erg wel bij varen heb ik het gevoel.

Google+: View post on Google+

Post imported by Google+Blog. Created By Daniel Treadwell.

★ "My Tweets are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's…

Jan Seurinck — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 16:04:56 +0000

"My Tweets are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view(s) in any way."

Soms denk ik toch: zoek een andere werkgever.

Google+: View post on Google+

Post imported by Google+Blog. Created By Daniel Treadwell.

★ Eigenlijk ben ik wel benieuwd wat we daar over een paar tiental jaar over gaan denken….

Jan Seurinck — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 20:52:56 +0000

Eigenlijk ben ik wel benieuwd wat we daar over een paar tiental jaar over gaan denken. Je kan een blog vol schrijven over rechtzaken, patentkwesties, vermeende en andere monopolies.

Moeten we er ons bij neerleggen dat de markt en de onzichtbare hand misschien toch niet zo werken als we ons vaak voorstellen of moeten we geloven dat die onzichtbare hand ons, wanneer dat nodig is wel van Google weg zal leiden?

Embedded Link

Why a Google antitrust investigation is a mistake
After years of finger-pointing by competitors, Google is finally coming under the scrutiny of federal antitrust regulators. But just like a similar investigation into Microsoft a decade ago, a federal…

Google+: View post on Google+

Post imported by Google+Blog. Created By Daniel Treadwell.

★ Oei

Jan Seurinck — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 12:51:22 +0000

Oei

Reshared post from +Dan Gillmor

UPDATED

What a crappy and arguably hypocritical (see below for context) move by the Wall Street Journal, which has been running an occasionally overwrought but still extremely useful series of articles in recent months re online privacy. The WSJ is changing its own privacy policy in a way that mocks everything it's been complaining about — giving itself the right "to connect personally identifiable information with Web browsing data without user consent."

More insulting, the Journal couches this shift in marketing-speak, such as the notion that it's merely "streamlining" its approach. Yeah, right, as long as streamlining means betraying.

Remember: I and other Journal readers are paying real money to use that site. We are not getting something for free in return for handing over some personal information. The Journal is just greedy.

I'm not sure whether to just cancel my online subscription or find countermeasures. Suggestions welcome…

Update: A Journal reporter emailed me to say that by using the word "hypocritical" I'm not being fair to the paper's news pages, which he says are absolutely separate from the business operations and opinion pages. I've added the word "arguably" before "hypocritical" above. Nonetheless, he raises a valuable point, and the issue is worth a further discussion, which I'll post separately on my Mediactive blog (and probably here as well).

Embedded Link

Wall Street Journal Revises its Privacy Policy

Google+: View post on Google+

Post imported by Google+Blog. Created By Daniel Treadwell.