RaiseYourVote.com, a website paid for by the Democratic Party, has just launched a Voter Registration Widget.  I am unable to embed the widget in a blog post, but you can see it in action here.

And there’s even a backend that offers analytics for website owners:

Get your own widget at RaiseYourVote.

Apple’s Get a Mac advertisement campaign primarily consists of television commercials featuring actor Justin Long as the personification of an Apple Mac Computer, and humorist John Hodgman as the personification of a PC running Microsoft Windows.  The general explicit message of these ads is quite simple: Mac is a cool young guy and PC is a middle-aged loser.  Indeed, this represents the view most people have towards Macs and PC’s in modern society.  Macs, statistically and apparently, are more popular among college students, artists, and designers, while PC’s are more popular among word-processing and spreadsheet-crunching white-collar workers.  On top of the explicit message of cool versus loser, the ads explain how Macs are easier to use than PC’s.

However, more implicitly, these ads actually tell the story of two individuals: PC, who is part of a powerful bureaucracy, and Mac, who is a free and independent individual.  This can be seen particularly in the 2007 commercial entitled “Podium.” In each ad, the PC usually tries to remedy his shortcomings, convince someone that he is better than the Mac or deceitfully trick someone into buying a PC. In each of these scenarios, the PC is reminiscent of an authoritative figure, be it a politician, boss, or corporation.

“Podium” begins with the typical scene of Mac and PC introducing themselves in a plain white space.  From the initial freeze frame, one can instantly recognize Mac as a laid-back individual, and PC as an official in a suit behind a podium.  In almost every case, a person behind a podium is an authority.  Here, PC almost appears to be connected to the podium, while Mac is free and relaxed with his hands in his pockets.  The podium is massive, bulky, and ordinary, just like the institutions with which Apple attempts to associate Microsoft.  From this frame alone, Apple depicts Mac as lighter and free.  This is a common theme in the campaign, such as in Stuffed, when PC is literally bloated with commercial free trial software.

After the computers introduce themselves, Mac turns to PC and asks, “Why so official?”  This makes immediate mockery of PC’s authority by questioning it, since authority, when questioned, ceases to exist.  (Real authority resists being questioned.)  PC responds that “some people are giving up on [Microsoft Windows] Vista.”  The language here is important.  By having PC say “some” people, verses perhaps “everyone,” the advertisement makes it seem as if certain individuals are taking the initiative to question the old way.  If PC had said “everyone,” it would simply sound like just another upgrade, or another mandatory software switch ordered by corporate IT departments.  On the contrary, “some people” are making independent and informed decisions, an act that directly challenges established bureaucratic order.  That Hodgman’s PC character is often silly and ridiculous parallels the absurdity many people see in bureaucracies.

On the outset it may seem absurd to analyze these characters so deeply.  They are, after all, merely personifications of computers.  However, Pui-Yan Lam argues in her article “May the Force of the Operating System Be with You: Macintosh Devotion as Implicit Religion” that computers indeed have deep meaning and purpose for their users.  In fact, Lam describes the computer as “a reflective medium through which individuals create identity and meaning” (Lam 244). Macintosh fans, therefore, are not just fans of the Macintosh operating system, but rather of “the relationship between technology and society” (Lam 244). That is, a relationship that more closely represents one between two intelligent beings.  In this light, personification of the computers and analysis thereof is reasonable.

Apple’s ad campaign tells the story of a person who is part of a bureaucratic organization and a person who is a free individual, ultimately asking the viewer to question the status quo of Microsoft Corporation’s role in society.

PC explains, “We PC’s won’t give up.  If your printer isn’t compatible with Vista, I say, buy a new printer.”  This attitude reflects the way in which Microsoft has treated its customers in the past.  Microsoft, which has been accused by the Department of Justice of monopolistic behavior, has had such power over the technology sector that it has been able to force users and developers to adopt to its proprietary standards and software (United States v. Microsoft, 1998).  In this sense, Microsoft is one’s totalitarian leader, one’s unyielding boss, or one’s unreasonable professor.

This sentiment is in line with Apple’s past, according to Lam. In the 1980′s, Apple’s competitor was IBM, which “was perceived as the symbol of uniformity, bureaucracy, and authoritarianism, as depicted in the famous ’1984′ commercial” (Lam 248). The 1984 commercial references George Orwell’s 1984 (which is about an authoritarian government) and introduces the Macintosh. “Since the 1990′s,” Lam continues, “Bill Gates, the co-founder of Microsoft, has become the primary enemy for many Mac enthusiasts.”  Having a clearly defined enemy is important for building a community around a brand, as Lara Lee and Susan Fournier argue in the Harvard Business Review.  These conflicts allow members of the community (the “in” group) to unite against something else (the “out” group) (Fournier 209).

Get a Mac serves to remind people that Microsoft, the enemy, represents a contradiction of the core American values of openness and freedom.

But if Microsoft is anti-America, why does the commercial proceed with PC giving an altered version of John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address?  PC says, “ask not what Vista can do for you; ask what you can buy for Vista.”  Perhaps Apple is using America’s historical distrust of big government to create a distrust of big corporations, namely, Microsoft.  It is probably not a coincidence that this commercial depicting PC as a United States President was released in November, 2007, when George W. Bush’s approval rating was around 33%, the lowest it had ever been at the time.  Though Kennedy and Bush were quite different, both are American presidents and thus represent the same thing. It is not difficult to imagine how the meeting in Apple’s marketing department regarding this ad may have went.  What could PC be depicted as that most people dislike right now?  The President.  But it would be much too controversial to mock the current president.  How about a dead president?  Perfect; get Hodgman and Long in here!

Now we have PC telling the viewer what to do (buy a printer).  Perhaps, then, PC is not representing a subordinate to an authority; it would appear that PC himself is the authority.  That is, the personification of PC is the idea of authority and the corresponding undesirable concepts such as bureaucracy and totalitarianism.  That would make the PC user a subject to the computer, and the computer the ruler over the user.

Therefore, Apple’s Get a Mac ad campaign depicts PC users as slaves to their computers, and offers buying a Mac as the path to freedom.

The idea of a Mac being a path to freedom can also be taken in a religious context, according to Lam, who quotes several interviews and websites to portray that “the bonds between computers and individuals are the foundation for the fellowship among the Mac believers and their actions” (Lam 251).  The bond becomes an openly religious and spiritual experience, and Lam even defines the term “MacKiDo,” which means “the Way to achieve enlightenment through the Power of Macintosh” (Lam 250).  She describes Mac User Groups as “congregations” (Lam 252) and a Mac devotee as a “software evangelist.”  The idea of achieving “enlightenment” through Mac is the religious parallel to the political idea of achieving freedom through Mac.

In discussing the theme of subject versus free individual, one must consider the 2006 ad “Meant for Work.” In it, PC is exhausted and mentally beaten after having children use him for creative purposes instead of work.  After discussing with Mac that he is designed for work and not play, PC turns around to reveal a large and very noticeable anarchy symbol stuck on his back.  Clearly this is not to say that PC represents anarchy, but to show that the children who were using PC were attempting to rebel.

The theme of rebellion is not new to Apple marketing; to counter IBM and then Microsoft, Apple “wanted a machine for free-thinking, discriminating nonconformists and rebels like themselves,” Lam quotes the editor of MacWorld (Lam 255).  This demonstrates the binary between what Apple portrays its competitors as, and what it sees itself as.  Towards the end of her essay, Lam further asserts “Mac devotees… are actually defending their beliefs on an utopian future in in which humans and technology work in harmony” (Lam 259).  Indeed, these opposing symbols in “Meant for Work,” an anarchy symbol stuck on an authority figure, is a clear call to action.  It is calling the viewer to take his or her own action against the Microsoft tyranny by throwing out their evil PC and liberating themselves with a Mac.

That PC often is portrayed as downtrodden shows that the individuals are starting to win.

In the 2008 ad “Throne,” this message could not be any more clear.  PC sits on a king’s throne wearing a crown and robe, explaining that his “subjects” (evidently, users) will never leave him because he has made it difficult for them to transfer their files and settings.  Mac responds with an explanation of how easy it actually is to free oneself from PC and switch to Mac.  This ad is clearly in line with the conclusion drawn from “Podium,” as well as with the overall theme of the marketing campaign.

It appears, however, that both “Meant for Work” and “Throne” have been quietly removed from Apple’s official website (“Get a Mac”), and as of writing can only be found on third-party video hosting platforms such as YouTube.  Though it is not clear when the ads were removed, one could speculate that the ads are no longer effective because President Barack Obama’s current approval rating has been around 50%, the highest presidential approval rating since the Get a Mac campaign started.  Another possibility is that these ads caused some controversy, though this seems less likely given that they were not overtly anti-Bush; the message is implicit.

Regardless, it seems pretty clear based on the correlation between the content of the ads and the presidential approval rating that Apple used political sentiment to make consumers fear their PC.

Note: This post was drafted before MacRumors revealed on May 21 that Apple’s Get a Mac campaign has been removed from Apple’s website.

Sources

1. Fournier, Susan, and Lara Lee. “Getting Brand Communities Right.“ Harvard Business Review Apr. 2009: 105-11. Print.
2. Lam, Pui-Yan. “May the Force of the Operating System Be with You: Macintosh Devotion as Implicit Religion.“ Sociology of Religion 62.2 (2001):  243-62. Academic Search Premier. Web. 25 Mar. 2010.

So we’ve all been there.  Reading the tiny print on the back of a box of Lean Cuisine, trying to figure out how long to microwave, at what power level, when to stir, etc.  Isn’t the purpose of frozen meals  is to make our lives more convenient, not more complicated?

Enter Smart Microwave.  Hold up a box of Fish Fingers to the barcode reader, and Smart Microwave does the rest.  If your food needs to be stirred at some point, Smart Microwave will alert you via its display screen and automated voice.  While you are waiting, you can read useful sponsored information related to your meal, such as coupons, special promotions, and recipes, on the microwave’s display screen.

Background

Levees.Org is a not-for-profit grassroots organization founded by my mother and me in December, 2005, while we were exiled from New Orleans.  Our mission is education that the catastrophic flooding of New Orleans was a man-made federal disaster, not a natural one.  Today we have over 24,000 members and chapters in six states.

I have decided to share what we have learned in order to help other organizations and causes.  It’s important to note that none of this requires a social media professional.  Once everything is setup, the workflow is simple.  (If you need proof, ask my mother!  She’s been running our online presence for months now without any assistance from me.)

Top organic and referral traffic sources for Levees.Org over a certain period

Conquer Google

We control 8 of the 11 links on the first results page on Google for [levees.org].  How?  Syndication is key.

1. Syndicate content at all major video sites using TubeMogul.
2. Syndicate Twitter and Blog feeds in as many places as possible, such as Facebook, Myspace, Tumblr, Friendfeed, LinkedIn, Plaxo and more.
3. Cross post on other blogs.  We do this on NOLA.com.  (Bonus: these posts sometimes appear on Google as “news.”)
4. Pay PRweb to publish press releases on various sites.  (example)

Dominate YouTube

We used to host our own videos using a paid service.  Big mistake.  Now we host all of our videos for free on YouTube, where they can go viral.  Consequently, YouTube is our #4 top website referrer, sending mostly new visitors.

Our primary goal is always to be featured on the YouTube top-100 lists.  Here’s how we get there:

1. We’re never shy about asking our members to login or create accounts at YouTube to rate, “favorite,” and comment on our video.  We even use YouTube annotations over our video to point to the rate button.  As a result, our videos are often featured as the highest rated or most commented-on videos.
2. Whenever we upload a video, we immediately do a massive push to drive as much traffic as possible.  We give our members a 24-hour timeframe to watch the video and send to their friends, and we even coordinate these efforts in advance with bloggers.  As a result, we make it to the top-100 “viewed today” page more often than an organization our size should.

Levees.Org takes the #4 spot on YouTube News & Politics, competing with popular topics such as Palin, Obama, and the Viacom/YouTube lawsuit

Leverage Wikipedia

Most people don’t think of Wikipedia in their social media marketing efforts.  They should.

Wikipedia is our #2 top traffic source and #1 referrer; nearly 5% of our traffic comes from Wikipedia.  This is because our members have placed Levees.Org links under the external links section of relevant Wikipedia articles.  Along with adding links to articles, we have spent time improving articles and interlinking related articles.

We’ve also created entirely new articles, such as Flood Control Act of 1965.  It didn’t take much effort; the article started like this and was expanded by the community.  In fact, we didn’t even add our link to that article; someone else did later on.

Levees.Org is listed as the first external link in many relevant Wikipedia articles. The YouTube link (#4) is to our video.

Rethink Conversion Goals

In 2005, all that mattered to us as far as social media was collecting e-mail addresses.  We did a great job at this thanks to the help of Internet Marketing expert Ken McCarthy.  However, eventually we realized (as Ken McCarthy finally has as well) that people aren’t using e-mail as their primary form of communication; many young people don’t seem to be using it at all.  We now think of gaining Facebook and Twitter followers as important as collecting e-mail addresses.

We redesigned our website to focus on social media.

Why to feature content based on conversion rate

It is common to feature links to the most popular pages of your site on the homepage.  For an example of this, see Real Celebrity Profiles.  However, there are a two problems with this technique:

1. Once an item enters the most popular list, it usually remains there due to increased exposure.  Over time, it becomes increasingly difficult for new pages to become featured.  (For example, Miley Cyrus has always dominated Real Celebrity Profiles’ homepage.)
2. The most popular pages usually do not have the highest conversion rates.

One alternative is to feature the content with the highest conversion rate.  A natural selection will then take place.  When a page with high conversion rate is featured, odds are that the increased exposure will ultimately lower its conversion rate.  It may fall off the featured list within a minute of entering.  This creates a survival-of-the-fittest competition, until finally pages that retain high conversion rates despite being popular are the ones being featured.  High conversion rate + traffic = many conversions.

How to feature content based on conversion rate

1. Use Google Analytics to track conversion goals

If you do not have Google Analytics on your site, sign up and install it now for free.  You will need to setup Google Analytics to track conversion goals before proceeding.

Unfortunately, the Google Analytics API does not allow you to access your Adsense revenue data.  If your conversion is Adsense clicks, read how to setup Adsense as a goal in Analytics.

2. Download Google Analytics PHP Interface

Download the latest version of GAPI and upload gapi.class.php to your web directory.

3. Place the Featured Content List code on your site

Copy and paste the code below onto your site, wherever you’d like the Featured Content List to appear.  All you need to fill in is your Google Account email and password, and your site profile ID.  To find your profile ID: login to Analytics, view your profile, and find &id=##### in the URL.

You may optionally edit other parts of the code.

<?php
// For help, visit http://stanfordrosenthal.com/?p=95

define('ga_email','Your Google Account Email');
define('ga_password','Your Google Account Password');

// To find your profile ID, open your profile in your browser and look for &id=##### in the URL.
define('ga_profile_id','Your Site Profile ID'); 	

require 'gapi.class.php'; // relative URL to GAPI

$ga = new gapi(ga_email,ga_password);

// Change '1' to 2, 3, or 4 depending on which goal you are measuring.  Use goalCompletionsAll for all goals.
$goal = 'goal1Completions';

// Modify begin date if you'd like YYYY-MM-DD
$beginDate = '2005-01-01';

// The number of links you'd like to appear
$limit = 5;

// Through today's date
$endDate = date('o-m-d');			

echo $endDate;

$ga->requestReportData(ga_profile_id,array('pagePath','pageTitle'),array($goal),'-'.$goal,'',$beginDate,$endDate,1,$limit);
?>

<ul>
<?php foreach($ga->getResults() as $result): ?>
<li><a href="<?php echo $result->getpagePath() ?>"><?php echo $result->getpageTitle() ?></a></li>
<?php endforeach ?>
</ul>

Notes

It would be ideal to cache this list to speed up the load time of your site.  If you get more than 10,000 pageviews per day, you will need to implement caching in order to stay within your Google Analytics API quota.

Please leave comments below with your suggestions, questions, or comments.

If you use this technique successfully, I’d love to hear from you.

The historian of science may be tempted to exclaim that when paradigms change, the world itself changes with them

Thomas Kuhn, Black-body theory and the quantum discontinuity

Thomas Kuhn, famous for his work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, examined the history of science and concluded that humanity’s perceptions of the world change as science develops.

Mehran Sahami (above), a “Googler” and a lecturer at Stanford University, tells his students, “It’s like you are geometers… living in the time of Euclid.” We are going through a scientific revolution comparable to the one Euclid pioneered 2,300 years ago.

And we are going to have to rethink some things. Langdon Winner writes in The Whale and the Reactor, “New worlds are being made… it simply will not work unless human behavior changes to suit its form and process.”

New terms in ICT such as cloud computing and Web 2.0 exemplify the changes that we are currently undergoing. Nearly every action an Internet user performs is recorded, stored, analyzed, and shared with other websites. Each user action on the web creates a butterfly effect, resulting in unintended results such as the action being published on the user’s Facebook wall. This makes the cloud exponentially more powerful than humans. Furthermore, the cloud is so complex that no one can possibly ever know where their information is going. This blog post may (hopefully) get shared on Facebook, posted to Twitter, and then emailed to someone. In that process dozens of mashups will have collected and stored this blog post, or at least a link to it.

What does the cloud mean for society? Surya over at the Silent Eloquence blog pointed out a year ago how the cloud changes an individual’s thought process. In the past if I were to write a journal (I believe that is what we used before blogs) entry about the future of society, I would probably draw a mindmap connecting various thoughts and reflect on my own experiences in society and my own thoughts and ambitions. Today if I were to write a blog entry on the future of society I would probably Google a term such as [future of society]. Odds are that my Google search will provide me with more than enough inspiration to start writing. This clearly marks a dependence on the cloud for basic thought processes.

A few months after Surya discussed this, Wired Magazine ran a cover story titled, “The End of Science.” Wired came to practically the same conclusion as Surya, except on a much larger scale. They believe that this use of data as a first-resort will replace the process of hypothesis. An interesting example is the software that Google uses to translate web pages. Before computers a linguists was required to understand a language completely and even understand the cultures involved. Now, Google’s algorithms can take advantage of billions of cached documents to make sense of language mathematically. From the Wired article:

This is a world where massive amounts of data and applied mathematics replace every other tool that might be brought to bear. Out with every theory of human behavior, from linguistics to sociology. Forget taxonomy, ontology, and psychology. Who knows why people do what they do? The point is they do it, and we can track and measure it with unprecedented fidelity. With enough data, the numbers speak for themselves. (Wired Magazine, July 2008)

At this rate of progress, it is possible that linguists be as threatened as travel agents? As we communicate through Google Translation, we rely on an algorithm analyzing essentially the sum of all human knowledge. Most users will not be able to begin to comprehend what makes the translation work, but it does. This is merely one example of a complex system that we have created and will increasingly depend on.