I think its time to broaden my horizons beyond my own shameful conspicuous consumption and random inclinations.

Anyway, I hope you’ll join me once rebranding is complete. Why wouldn’t you? I’m awesome and outrageous. Truly, truly outrageous.

Best,

BT

For centuries sailors have been telling stories of encountering monstrous ocean waves which tower over one hundred feet in the air and toss ships about like corks. Historically oceanographers have discounted these reports as tall tales– the embellished stories of mariners with too much time at sea. But in the last eleven years scientists have discovered strong evidence indicating that such massive rogue waves do exist.

This rare photo of a rogue wave was taken by first mate Philippe Lijour aboard the supertanker Esso Languedoc, during a storm off Durban in South Africa in 1980.

Check out this article for a good history of these waves. Until recently, mathematical models concluded that these waves could only strike every ten thousand years or so (obviously not the case). This began to change on New Year’s Day in 1995, when a rock-steady oil platform in the North Sea produced what was considered the first hard evidence of a rogue wave. The platform had a laser designed to measure wave height.

During a furious storm, it registered an 84-foot giant.

It’s just like the Poseidon Adventure, only very real. Apparently, the Bermuda Triangle is a breeding ground for Rouge Waves, offering a potential explanation for some of the ‘mysterious and supernatural’ ship disappearances over the years.

By one definition, the titans of the sea rise to heights of at least 25 meters, or 82 feet, about the size of an eight-story building. Scientists have calculated their theoretical maximum at 198 feet — higher than the Statue of Liberty or the Capitol rotunda in Washington. Large rogues seem to average around 100 feet.

According to NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), over the past twenty or thirty years, rouge waves have come to be recognized as a unique phenomena  with several possible causes:

1) Constructive interference. Several different wave trains of differing speeds and directions meet at the same time. The heights of the crests are additive so that an extreme wave may result when very high waves are included in the wave trains. The effect is normally short lived since the wave trains continue to separate and move on.

2) Focusing of wave energy. When storm forced waves are developed in a water current counter to the wave direction an interaction can take place which results in a shortening of the wave frequency. The result is the superimposing of the wave trains and the generation of extreme waves. Examples of currents where these are sometimes seen are the Gulf Stream and Agulhas current. Extreme wave developed in this regime tend to be longer lived.

3) Normal part of the wave spectrum. The generation of waves on water results not in a single wave height but in a spectrum of waves distributed from the smallest capillary waves to large waves indeed. Within this spectrum there is a finite possibility of each of the wave heights to occur with the largest waves being the least likely. The wave height most commonly observed and forecast is the significant wave height. This is defined as the average of the one third highest waves. The random nature of waves implies that individual waves can be substantially higher than the significant wave height. In fact, observations and theory show that the highest individual waves in a typical storm with typical duration to be approximately two times the significant wave height. Some reported rogue waves are well within this factor of two envelope. Waves higher than roughly twice the significant wave height fall into the category of extreme or rogue waves.

While not the usual subject matter of PSM, I found this to be very interesting and worth sharing.

Here is Stephen, attempting to bring the short tie back to prominence

Daisy and Will, both looking ever so dapper. This is Daiy's first Formal Friday.

How did this event grow into such an occasion? I’ll tell you.

Formal Friday’s began as Stephen and I wearing ties to the office. As I only did it on Mondays and Fridays, it was casually referred to it as bookend tie days.  From there I decided the best way to get other people involved was to turn the practice of wearing a tie to work (at a job which didn’t require one) into something greater; a tribe.

The first thing to do was understand the appeal of this activity (it feels good to dress up, you look nice). Next I decided to define the activity in such a way as to make it more inclusive.  That was how bookend tie days became Formal Fridays.

One of the larger barriers of entry into Formal Fridays communicated to me was that people forgot. Silly? Maybe, but waking up in a foggy haze on a Friday morning does not easily lend itself to remembering to wear a tie. Being a mobile guru, I’ve come up with a remedy to this situation. I set up a reminder service for my colleagues who choose to make use of it. Each Friday at 7Am they recieve a text message (SMS for those in the know) reminding them to wear a tie. Simple. As a special treat, they get a message at the end of the day at 6PM congratulating them on a great day, and of course, for wearing a tie.

Formal attire is a general term for clothing suitable for formal social events, such as a wedding, formal garden party or dinner, débutante cotillion, dance, or race. I think its safe to say that we’re using the word formal in the loosest sense.

Some might agrue the whole thing hypocritical; wearing a tie doesn’t make you “formal” and that we are in fact dumbing down formal style, just as we complain that casual friday has dumbed-down style in general. I (obviously) disagree with that assertion. A tie can be a powerful thing, especially when set against the backdrop of an office of open collars.

How will Formal Fridays expand? That’s not for me to dicate, but for those who choose to participate to decide. Perhaps someone will forgo a tie, but wear a blazer and pocket square. Next Friday might see a 3-piece suit stroll into the office.

The point is that we’ve identified 2 key points people relate to. Its fun to dress up and you look nice dressed up. While you might think this is merely my opinion, each new member of the Formal Friday crowd makes my point that much more valid. The reality is, if dressing up didn’t provide some sort of positive consequence (be it the self-satisfaction from looking at yourself in the mirror that morning, a smile on the street from a random passerby acknowledging your sartorial instinct or something as simple as the joy of participating in a group of like-minded individuals), they wouldn’t continue to do it.

Formal Fridays is now both a brand and a movement. Will you be wearing your tie next Friday?

Those who know me may recall my long running theme of blazer fridays. This gradually evolved into Tie-Day Fridays. Here we are at the next step in the evolution of the movement to discredit and dishearten the casual Friday crowd; formal Fridays.

Others are joining the movement.

So what if you dress code only requires a button down and trousers (the so-called business causal look)? Dress to impress and intimidate. No one is ever going to look down on you for wearing a tie or blazer.

I’m looking forward to next Formal Friday. I hope you are too.

“an action-oriented association designed to clear obstacles to market development, to establish guidelines and best practices for sustainable growth, and to evangelize the mobile channel for use by brands and third party content providers.”

I’ve always felt they did a servicable enough job in such a fragmented industry (in the US). The selection of Wehrs was announced only days ago and I intended to withold any comment, but am going to have to say something after reading some remarks by him today.

I approve of Mike Wehrs.

First some context; The Center for Digital Democracy and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group filed a complaint today calling for an inquiry and injunctive relief concerning unfair and deceptive mobile marketing practices,calling for federal regulation to rein in mobile marketing practices the organizations deem “unfair” and “deceptive” to handset users.

Wehrs shot back,

“If you read the filing in detail — and I have — you see certain types of comments and platitudes, but nothing specific,” he said. “There’s not a single (example) of where something has gone wrong.

“The industry needs to be held accountable to behave responsibly. If the industry doesn’t behave responsibly there needs to be an escalation path. But I think we have indicated we are behaving responsibly.”

I like how he injects a bit of attitude into his words, while still sounding diplomatic. He’s essentially calling their accusations biased, meaningless, and trite.

Good for him.

So often leaders soften their words in favor of pc-sounding dribble. I hope he keeps it up. Sometimes people rally around a lightening rod and that might be just what this fragmented industry of warring players (more like factions) needs. Better us joining “together against the world” than fighting each other for an extra dollar. I’m looking forward to hearing more of what he has to say.

Or as Jordan Vance would say (perhaps more appropriately for this post), “You don’t want people to confuse refined taste and style with elitism.” He’s right, you don’t.

Do I care what people think? Not so much. Definitely not as much as I once did. That being said, I wouldn’t want someone to refrain from indulging in elegant style due to the fear of it being perceived as elitism.

Finally, this past Friday I decided that “style is simply a combination of good taste and confidence.”

I think of Justin Vernon (driving force behind musical project Bon Iver), who according to Wikipedia, left Raleigh and moved back to Wisconsin, spending three months in his father’s cabin in the woods of northern Wisconsin following a bad breakup and a bout with illness. He did not intend to write or record any music during the time but eventually laid down the songs that would make up 2008′s critically acclaimed ‘For Emma, Forever Ago.’ His story makes me wonder about fate; destiny if you would. Does such a force exist? Upon reflecting on this story, I recalled the Sydney Pollack movie ‘Jeremiah Johnson.’

Jeremiah Johnson stars Robert Redford as the title character, a mountain man who wishes to live the life of a hermit but becomes the unwilling object of a long vendetta by Indians when he proves to be the match of their warriors in one-to-one combat on the early frontier. Both Justin and Jeremiah retreated into isolation in an attempt to distance themselves from their past. Neither could really escape their ‘destiny.’ IMDB deftly identifies within JJ that

“this tale of isolation in the great rocky mountains, perhaps reflects America’s mood as the Vietnam war was coming to a close … Johnson, seemingly war weary, yet with a sense of respect for indigenous cultures as if one informs the other. The only thing he seems to want is to share utopia with those who were there before him and perhaps leave his implied past behind. But even in the vacuum of an isolated life, Jeremiah Johnson seems doomed by threads to culture he cannot completely escape.”

Since the past informs the future, can you ever truly ‘escape’ your past?

Not many answers here (is that becoming a theme?), just a lot to think about. Have you ever tried to escape your circumstances to no avail? I moved to LA to escape the cubicle jockeying I experienced on Wall Street. I hated being tied to a phone, essentially manipulating (tryin to, at least) people all day. I wound up working an inside sales job at Yahoo, where not much was different. That wasn’t as extreme a case as presented above, but looking back it strikes me as oddly similar. This isn’t to say life isn’t open to do whatever your heart desires. Sometimes things just don’t play out how you anticipate. Anyone have a similar experience?

I picked up this paisley handkerchief from Nordstrom’s. While it’s a bit louder than the squares I usually wear, I’m quite excited about it. Expect to see me out and about with it on Friday.

These boots are designed by Pozu for Maharishi. Note the tweed outer lining up top if you can. I realize it isn’t the greatest image and I’ll see what I can do about taking more. That lining is removable and comes off to reveal a dessert boot. To be honest, I’m not yet sold on their durability, but they get high marks for comfort.

I leave you with some of Mr. Combes’ words from The Way We Live Now: 11-14-99: Tastes; Secrets and Ties:

I wear ties, and buy ties, because I like them, and I like them because in good weather or foul, in crisis or celebration, they bring color into my life. I wear ties because although they are the most striking emblem of male conformity, they are also the easiest means of expressing individuality. I wear ties because I don’t have to, because in an increasingly dressed-down, homogenized world, they can set you apart. I wear ties because they nurture the inner fop. Also the outer one.

The marketing community at-large has failed to embrace mobile as one medium acting in concert with others as part of a cross-media, comprehensive, and interactive strategy. Instead, many agencies view it as an add-on. They offer clients the chance to run a ‘mobile campaign’ instead of instinctively incorporating a mobile component to the overall campaign from the start.

The most literal example of this I can provide is the ad:tech conference series. ad:tech classifies itself as ‘the event for digital marketing.’ When attending show the few months back in New York, I was looking forward to visiting the Go-Mobile Zone, which was supposed to highlight mobile companies. Excitement quickly turned to surprise and disappointment when I found that this ‘zone’ was completely separated from the main show flow (as opposed to in the exhibit hall itself). This only served to perpetuate the idea that mobile is an independent medium, when in reality, the success of mobile marketing is so often dependent on the success of the cross-medium marketing that accompanies it. ad:tech 2009 in San Francisco will be no different, as evidenced by the floor plan. What are advertising and marketing professionals supposed to think?

Screens, screens, screens.
Americans now spend the majority of their days glaring at one screen or another. More and more, marketers and advertisers are faced with the struggle of crafting a fragmented narrative that transcends medium. The industry has failed to grasp (or at best, failed to respond to the notion) that the third screen is now the first. Mobile devices are omnipresent. TVs are relegated to the home, and not even laptops are accessible everywhere. It’s the cell phone that is always just a pocket away. How can they expect to successfully tell a story across so many screens when they largely ignore the one most prevalent?

Are there reasons why agencies have not correctly embraced the mobile medium? Of course, and I’ll do my best to explore this in the future. Unfortunately, I believe it comes down to a lack of understanding of how mobile media differs from traditional media. With that confusion emerges an ability to capitalize on mobile both from a strategic planning and creative perspective. A year from now, will we be wondering if 2010 will be the year of mobile? I hope not.