Have a look at this official promotional video for Western Australia and then we’ll talk. When I say ‘talk’ I mean ‘rant’.

Tourism marketing in Western Australia is famously abysmal. Look critically at this from the viewpoint of international tourism marketing. What is the positioning of Western Australia as a tourism product? What is it that distinguishes Western Australia from any other tourism destination in the world? Come on; I’m waiting!

It’s a product that doesn’t know what it is. The ad is a case study in poor strategic thinking.

Does the tourism authority think we the only place in the world with beaches and waterways? The only thing to be said in favour of Perth beaches is that they are quaint, reflecting the determination of generations to resist ANY tourism development of ANY sort on even ONE of them. Welcome to 1960.

Why do we have to re-assure people that there are designer clothing shops in Perth? Are we competing with Paris?

Who is the target market for this ad? If it is young people, are they going to fly 24 hours on a plane to drink beer in the Ocean Beach Hotel? “Well honey; it’s Carnivale in Rio or a beer in a pub in Perth. Toss a coin.”

If ‘relaxed lifestyle’ is all we have going for us; NEWSFLASH; that’s an immigration strategy, not a tourism strategy.

If local colour is what we’re selling, for God’s sake, don’t fill up the ad with bland-looking models acting badly. Use REAL people who look interesting. Let’s hear some Australian accents! Americans in particular find Australian accents very engaging; instead we serenade them with insipid guitar music.

Ironically, they’re using Russell Morris’s ‘The Real Thing’ as the sound track and they’ve completely emasculated the REAL version and turned it into MUZAC. The original is a fabulous arrangement which could be the basis for a very strong campaign and HOLD THE PHONE they’ve removed the emotional underpinning of the song; the line that says: “there’s a meaning there for me”. *Bangs head against desk*.

Now what is the only thing in this ad which will be remembered by international viewers? Close your eyes for a minute and pretend you’re not Australian. What stood out?

Kangaroos. The reason they keep putting kangaroos into ads for Australia is that research shows people love them. So, knowing that, do we create wildlife corridors close to the city and promote ourselves as the wild west of Australia? Do we invite tourists onto golf courses where kangaroos hang out? If Kings Park were populated with kangaroos and you could take your pet kangaroo for a hop along the beach, which city in Australia would Oprah be visiting?

Tourism marketing (like just about all marketing) is PRODUCT and BRANDING and not much else. We have neither product nor branding at present. Tourism Australia is absolutely correct to direct Oprah to Sydney, Melbourne and the Great Barrier Reef. They’re brands and Perth is not. How much do you want to bet Oprah will nurse a joey on camera?

Here’s a song about Perth.

Arthur C. Clarke said, “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”. And Bret R. Treasure said, “some magicians charge too much”. If you are a client, and you don’t know much about the web, you’re at risk of paying a lot more than you should.

Here are a few getting-started tips for people who need a web site but don’t know much about technology.

1. Be honest about your own capabilities

If you’ve never created a web page yourself, if you’ve never heard of ftp and if the following sends shivers up your spine,

you’re at risk of not getting good value for money. The word ‘sucker’ appears on your forehead as soon as you open your mouth and after that, your fate depends on the ethics and business model of the person/company you’re dealing with. Not to put too fine a point on it, the price you pay can be three times too high if you get it wrong. So if think Joomla is state of the art or even, a movie, use a consultant to help you through the process. Declaration of interest: that’s what I do.

2. Work out with the consultant/developer what the hell you’re doing

Because if you just walk into a web developer and say ‘I need a web site’, some will give you an off-the-shelf solution that is efficient for THEM to deliver and profitable for THEM to deliver. Some think it’s NOT in their interest to spend a lot of time with you working out your business objectives but that’s what needs to happen. If you’re already very clear on it and you are completely up to date on web technologies; different thing. Read on anyway.

3. Do things in the right order

If you’re not using a consultant I still recommend working out your business plan with an objective third party before you talk to a web developer. If you don’t know what the web can do for you, sit down with your consultant/advisor and brainstorm it.

If you want good SEO, involve that person at the planning stage, not after you’ve chosen a graphic designer or platform. Then do steps 4, 5 and 6.

4. Get your peeps together

A web developer will probably say they can do the lot – believe me; that’s not necessarily a good outcome.

Here’s what you need:

(a) Someone who can write good content (b) A good graphic designer (c) A web developer with experience on your platform of choice. By ‘platform’ I mean what software you’re using to create and maintain the web site. Many developers only use one platform; it may be over/underpowered and it may be overly complicated. Choose your platform with your consultant and your developer. (d) An SEO person. Search Engine Optimisation is only necessary if you want people to be able to find you on Google. (e) You may also need a professional photographer because, no, the ones you took yourself are not good enough. Likewise for video.

If there are people you trust with these skills, build the project around them. If you have a copywriter whose style you like, insist that the web developer use them. Same applies to the graphic artist whose style you like.

5. Do the pen and paper thing

Create a flow chart showing how you think the site should work. That way you’ll know how much content you need and people will be able to cost it properly. The consultant can drive this.

6. Get some quotes

Show your plan, your resources and your flow chart to a web developer. Crunch the numbers and make a decision not on the basis of the cheapest price but on who gives you the most confidence.

7. Be afraid

- Graphic designers and web developers will often say they do SEO. Oh really?
- Some companies do everything in-house. Often means a lack of specialists and a factory-like approach.
- Freelancers may not have adequate business systems and structures.
- Make sure you ask who in the business is doing what. Understand the process they use.
- Make sure you ask who owns the intellectual property.
- Insist on a contract and make sure it spells out a cheap dispute resolution process.
- Make sure you ask what happens to your web site, its code and its passwords when their main man goes out of business/has a mental breakdown.

8. Be very afraid

The fixed price plans offered by web development companies are designed to suck you in and spit you out. You don’t need a 10 page web site with a template and an SEO package. You need a web strategy that improves your business and pays for itself very quickly.

Using individual specialists will almost certainly cost you less than an all-in-one solution from a larger firm and you’ll get a better result.

Yesterday we launched the WA campaign for the Australian Sex Party. A good result; we got coverage in the daily paper, the talk radio station and two of three commercial TV stations.

I was struck by the high level of engagement by the media people who attended. Much nodding of heads when we spoke about 25 years of ludicrous censorship laws, the power of very conservative people in parliament and the need for more secular people to stand for election.

I asked Fiona Patten, the party leader, if this was typical of the response as she travelled the country and she said it was very much the case. It seems if the election were confined to members of the media, the Sex Party would form Government.

Why are the media (privately) so positive about the Sex Party? Clearly they are among the most politically engaged people in society. It would be interesting to test the proposition and research what is driving this. Here are my own speculations on the subject.

* People who have close access to what really goes on are not impressed by the nature of two party politics in Australia. This would follow naturally from cynicism in the media.

* The media, like the Sex Party, are frustrated that Australia lags in progressive social policy. This would result from idealism; another problem known to affect the media.

* The media dislike the narrow agenda that results from following the major parties. This would result from boredom :p

I think it would be a great tactic for one of the networks (and for our democracy) to publicly declare a Major Party Blackout Week during the election campaign and see what issues emerge. I suspect they would develop a far more interesting agenda and alter the course of the election.

Chances are slim. Today was the drawing of the ballot in all electorates; the only opportunity before the election for the media to gather all the candidates together in each constituency. In my electorate, Swan, no-one from the media attended. Neither did any media attend the draw of the Senate. They were all out following Julia Gillard. Boy, does that work – flying around the country visiting towns/cities for fractions of a day! The media might not like it, but they lap it up.

Maybe it’s just me. I find myself constantly between the amusing and the effective. Here’s a classic case. Tasked with the job of creating an election leaflet for my candidacy in the Federal Election, I couldn’t resist a dig at the predictability of the election leaflet: Picture of candidate. Vote 1. Australian flag if it’s for the Libs.

I’m confident the ad will get more cut-through than the average flyer. It’s more likely to be read. The risk is that people will decide the Sex Party aren’t taking things SERIOUSLY. It’s quite a big risk because the Party is already ‘out there’ by virtue of its name and platform.

On the other hand, it’s not a style of advertising the competition can use because it’s very difficult to get anything satirical through a committee. They just take themselves too seriously. The Sex Party doesn’t like committees because they remind people of things other than sex.

Cheeky, irreverent advertising doesn’t always work. Fuck it. Life’s short.

I’ve just authored three ads for the Australian Sex Party. Click the photo to see the full ad or the text links below the photo for versions II and III.

What to say to your Labor mates

What to say to your hippie friends

Advertising should fit the personality of the brand and the Australian Sex Party doesn’t take itself quite as seriously as the established parties. Not expecting the other parties to use humour all that much so it stakes out territory and appeals to those who find the adversarial thing a bit of a drone.

In those millions of pre-election conversations about to occur in workplaces and homes, very few people will put their hand up and say “I’m voting Sex Party”. We’re reminding people here that nobody sees who they vote for in the final analysis.

We’re also doing two other things in the ad; visually legitimising a vote for the party by showing a Sex Party vote on a ballot paper and we’re explaining that socially enlightened people are under-represented in parliament. If parliament is to represent average Australian values, we need to offset the current pre-dominance of religious, socially conservative politicians. Let’s shake things up a bit :p

The Media140 event was held in Perth this week and I attended as a guest blogger.

For me, one of the most interesting things about Media140 was seeing the effect of the Twitter Wall; the web page of tweets with the hashtag #media140 projected behind the speaker or panel in real time. A stream of consciousness about the event, at the event.

Many conferences these days (IT conferences in particular) have a Twitter back-channel; a conversation among Twitterers about the conference during the conference, but the idea that you show that stream in real time to the audience is, I think, a significant shift in conferencing.

I noticed that the ABC-influenced Media140 event in Sydney took a policy decision not to show the Wall in its video of the event. Apart from the obvious potential for people to spam, tweet profanities and send libellous messages, the Wall allows for a diverse commentary and some genuinely funny commentary. My co-blogger @grum was particularly sharp. And we saw the odd situation where panellist @richardgiles was dissing the audience for not asking incisive enough questions. There’s no doubt in my mind that the Wall adds significantly to the entertainment value of the event for those who attend. And it’s far more interesting than watching on-line because you have the tension of the speaker’s reaction to the comment about their bad hair or the fact that they’re droning on.

While experienced Twitterers on stage apparently had no issue with the Wall, Andrew Pascoe, the lawyer from Allens Arthur Robinson who knew little of Twitter was clearly rattled by the idea that he was for a time (1) not the centre of attention and (2) not able to follow the in-jokes. Some of my friends to whom I described the scene afterwards were sympathetic, describing the channelling of attention away from the speaker as rude.

I think most older people would take that line and I don’t think experienced speakers will countenance it in a normal conferencing situation. To me, it’s giving away some reverence for the speaker in return for a higher level of engagement among the audience. Price worth paying. Furthermore, I believe it is an important differentiator for Media140, which could evolve in the direction of Twitter-powered events, rather than events on how to deal with social media.

You can read my other posts here: a tremendously clever joke about media ownership that nobody got, my interview with Brett McCarthy of The West Australian and and an article about time-rich, cynical twitterers. Er, like me.

And if you’re not already doing so, follow me on twitter – @brettreasure

Photo by Paul Pichugin.

Foursquare and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this Internet a new application. The latest venture capital love object is Foursquare, which has signed up 275,000 New Yorkers to a mobile phone GPS app that lets their friends know where they are.

Business Insider details how the app works; you check in when you go to a venue (a place which serves alcohol) and you get points for visiting. Then, if a friend happens to be in the same street, you can meet and have drinks, just as if you’d actually organised it.

The Business Insider article is the normal breathless account of a new startup about to take over the world. The comments on the article tell another story. “I played with it for a few months, and obsessively checked in everywhere… I stopped participating over a month ago.” And “4 square fills up my Twitter with meaningless crap. Well I should say: even more meaningless crap.”

As I understand it, you can limit your Foursquare friends to a subset of your Twitter friends, but I suspect the status updates (which are juvenile in style) go to all contacts. This is spam for most people and will wear thin. If Foursquare can’t deliver this to only your interested subset, we’ll probably see Facebook and Twitter introduce friend categories. “Bar buddy/friend of mother”. Would seem to be a sensible development anyway.

For Gen Y in particular, mobile applications will affect how people meet and what they do when they get there. Although there seems to be nothing particularly compelling about Foursquare it has its own API so developers will build on the functionality. The value will be in creating apps that address specific niches. Groups of teen boys meeting new groups of teen girls. Business people finding the closest available php programmer. I can imagine an app that o.O that’s a good one. Might keep that one to myself :p

Christien Meindertsma spent three years researching the end uses of the range of raw materials that derive from pigs. Then she photographed the products that include a little bit of pig. Paint. Bullets. Beer. Sandpaper. Marshmallows. Beauty masks. To name a few. Her charming talk on the book follows.
I don’t know about you; I often have problems with Vimeo videos. You may have to play it through without volume first to buffer it locally and avoid the stop/starts.

TEDxAmsterdam: Christien Meindertsma from TEDxAmsterdam on Vimeo.

A simple book concept beautifully executed. Let me say that another way: the more clearly you define your project the more clearly you will communicate it and the greater your chances of success.

In this case, Christien’s marketing success allows her to powerfully comment on interconnectedness. Ordering the book and can’t wait for her next project.

Happy Australia Day.

I wrote a song.

It’s loosely based on Waltzing Matilda.

The words for that song, of course, were written by the great Australian Poet, Ukulele Paterson.

Thanks to my Producer, Leo Treasure, who is like a son to me.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Enex have just presented the results of their analysis of the ISP-filtering trials; the Government’s test on Internet censorship. Here is my selective summary of the Executive Summary:

There were two parts to the test; ‘protecting’ people against the sites the Government blacklists and filtering out sites that are not on the blacklist (if you don’t do that, you may as well not bother, as new sites are cropping up every miinute, I mean second).

As you’d expect, the systems all blocked the blacklist sites. If you know a URL, it’s easily blocked. As you’d also expect, trying to dynamically block sites is just not going to work. Enex claim that 80% of undesirable sites were blocked with the dynamic filtering. Leaving 20% of sites getting through the net. Not exactly a success. Improving the accuracy of this filtering, say Enex, will degrade Internet performance. This we knew.

Only 2/3 of customers said they would ‘probably or definitely’ continue to use such filtering. Given that these people volunteered to use the technology and are obviously in favour of filtering, it’s a very poor result.

Telstra did not even test the filtering option, saying it can be circumvented and it is not effective in blocking IM conversations/file transfers or Peer-to-Peer programs. This we already knew and Enex confirmed these conclusions.

It was always a ‘look at me’ government initiative designed to win votes from the family sector. It was also never going to work, as every informed tech-commentator said when it was floated. Incredibly, instead of the government acknowledging the idiocy of this initiative and pulling the pin on it, they are imposing mandatory filtering on ISPs. Incredible.