m.m.massey

Apparently 140 characters isn't enough ...

So Interesting via @wsj

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704111504576059713528698754.html

Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior

Can a regimen of no playdates, no TV, no computer games and hours of music practice create happy kids? And what happens when they fight back?

A lot of people wonder how Chinese parents raise such stereotypically successful kids. They wonder what these parents do to produce so many math whizzes and music prodigies, what it's like inside the family, and whether they could do it too. Well, I can tell them, because I've done it. Here are some things my daughters, Sophia and Louisa, were never allowed to do:

• have a playdate

• attend a sleepover

• be in a school play

• complain about not being in a school play

• watch TV or play computer games

• choose their own extracurricular activities

• get any grade less than an A

• not be the No. 1 student in every subject except gym and drama

• play any instrument other than the piano or violin

• not play the piano or violin.

I'm using the term "Chinese mother" loosely. I know some Korean, Indian, Jamaican, Irish and Ghanaian parents who qualify too. Conversely, I know some mothers of Chinese heritage, almost always born in the West, who are not Chinese mothers, by choice or otherwise. I'm also using the term "Western parents" loosely. Western parents come in all varieties.


All the same, even when Western parents think they're being strict, they usually don't come close to being Chinese mothers. For example, my Western friends who consider themselves strict make their children practice their instruments 30 minutes every day. An hour at most. For a Chinese mother, the first hour is the easy part. It's hours two and three that get tough.


Chinese parents can get away with things that Western parents can't. Once when I was young—maybe more than once—when I was extremely disrespectful to my mother, my father angrily called me "garbage" in our native Hokkien dialect. It worked really well. I felt terrible and deeply ashamed of what I had done. But it didn't damage my self-esteem or anything like that. I knew exactly how highly he thought of me. I didn't actually think I was worthless or feel like a piece of garbage.What Chinese parents understand is that nothing is fun until you're good at it. To get good at anything you have to work, and children on their own never want to work, which is why it is crucial to override their preferences. This often requires fortitude on the part of the parents because the child will resist; things are always hardest at the beginning, which is where Western parents tend to give up. But if done properly, the Chinese strategy produces a virtuous circle. Tenacious practice, practice, practice is crucial for excellence; rote repetition is underrated in America. Once a child starts to excel at something—whether it's math, piano, pitching or ballet—he or she gets praise, admiration and satisfaction. This builds confidence and makes the once not-fun activity fun. This in turn makes it easier for the parent to get the child to work even more.
Despite our squeamishness about cultural stereotypes, there are tons of studies out there showing marked and quantifiable differences between Chinese and Westerners when it comes to parenting. In one study of 50 Western American mothers and 48 Chinese immigrant mothers, almost 70% of the Western mothers said either that "stressing academic success is not good for children" or that "parents need to foster the idea that learning is fun." By contrast, roughly 0% of the Chinese mothers felt the same way. Instead, the vast majority of the Chinese mothers said that they believe their children can be "the best" students, that "academic achievement reflects successful parenting," and that if children did not excel at school then there was "a problem" and parents "were not doing their job." Other studies indicate that compared to Western parents, Chinese parents spend approximately 10 times as long every day drilling academic activities with their children. By contrast, Western kids are more likely to participate in sports teams.

The fact is that Chinese parents can do things that would seem unimaginable—even legally actionable—to Westerners. Chinese mothers can say to their daughters, "Hey fatty—lose some weight." By contrast, Western parents have to tiptoe around the issue, talking in terms of "health" and never ever mentioning the f-word, and their kids still end up in therapy for eating disorders and negative self-image. (I also once heard a Western father toast his adult daughter by calling her "beautiful and incredibly competent." She later told me that made her feel like garbage.)As an adult, I once did the same thing to Sophia, calling her garbage in English when she acted extremely disrespectfully toward me. When I mentioned that I had done this at a dinner party, I was immediately ostracized. One guest named Marcy got so upset she broke down in tears and had to leave early. My friend Susan, the host, tried to rehabilitate me with the remaining guests.

 Chinese parents can order their kids to get straight As. Western parents can only ask their kids to try their best. Chinese parents can say, "You're lazy. All your classmates are getting ahead of you." By contrast, Western parents have to struggle with their own conflicted feelings about achievement, and try to persuade themselves that they're not disappointed about how their kids turned out.

I've thought long and hard about how Chinese parents can get away with what they do. I think there are three big differences between the Chinese and Western parental mind-sets.


For example, if a child comes home with an A-minus on a test, a Western parent will most likely praise the child. The Chinese mother will gasp in horror and ask what went wrong. If the child comes home with a B on the test, some Western parents will still praise the child. Other Western parents will sit their child down and express disapproval, but they will be careful not to make their child feel inadequate or insecure, and they will not call their child "stupid," "worthless" or "a disgrace." Privately, the Western parents may worry that their child does not test well or have aptitude in the subject or that there is something wrong with the curriculum and possibly the whole school. If the child's grades do not improve, they may eventually schedule a meeting with the school principal to challenge the way the subject is being taught or to call into question the teacher's credentials.First, I've noticed that Western parents are extremely anxious about their children's self-esteem. They worry about how their children will feel if they fail at something, and they constantly try to reassure their children about how good they are notwithstanding a mediocre performance on a test or at a recital. In other words, Western parents are concerned about their children's psyches. Chinese parents aren't. They assume strength, not fragility, and as a result they behave very differently.

 If a Chinese child gets a B—which would never happen—there would first be a screaming, hair-tearing explosion. The devastated Chinese mother would then get dozens, maybe hundreds of practice tests and work through them with her child for as long as it takes to get the grade up to an A.

 Chinese parents demand perfect grades because they believe that their child can get them. If their child doesn't get them, the Chinese parent assumes it's because the child didn't work hard enough. That's why the solution to substandard performance is always to excoriate, punish and shame the child. The Chinese parent believes that their child will be strong enough to take the shaming and to improve from it. (And when Chinese kids do excel, there is plenty of ego-inflating parental praise lavished in the privacy of the home.)

.Second, Chinese parents believe that their kids owe them everything. The reason for this is a little unclear, but it's probably a combination of Confucian filial piety and the fact that the parents have sacrificed and done so much for their children. (And it's true that Chinese mothers get in the trenches, putting in long grueling hours personally tutoring, training, interrogating and spying on their kids.) Anyway, the understanding is that Chinese children must spend their lives repaying their parents by obeying them and making them proud.

By contrast, I don't think most Westerners have the same view of children being permanently indebted to their parents. My husband, Jed, actually has the opposite view. "Children don't choose their parents," he once said to me. "They don't even choose to be born. It's parents who foist life on their kids, so it's the parents' responsibility to provide for them. Kids don't owe their parents anything. Their duty will be to their own kids." This strikes me as a terrible deal for the Western parent.

Third, Chinese parents believe that they know what is best for their children and therefore override all of their children's own desires and preferences. That's why Chinese daughters can't have boyfriends in high school and why Chinese kids can't go to sleepaway camp. It's also why no Chinese kid would ever dare say to their mother, "I got a part in the school play! I'm Villager Number Six. I'll have to stay after school for rehearsal every day from 3:00 to 7:00, and I'll also need a ride on weekends." God help any Chinese kid who tried that one.

Don't get me wrong: It's not that Chinese parents don't care about their children. Just the opposite. They would give up anything for their children. It's just an entirely different parenting model.

Here's a story in favor of coercion, Chinese-style. Lulu was about 7, still playing two instruments, and working on a piano piece called "The Little White Donkey" by the French composer Jacques Ibert. The piece is really cute—you can just imagine a little donkey ambling along a country road with its master—but it's also incredibly difficult for young players because the two hands have to keep schizophrenically different rhythms.

Lulu couldn't do it. We worked on it nonstop for a week, drilling each of her hands separately, over and over. But whenever we tried putting the hands together, one always morphed into the other, and everything fell apart. Finally, the day before her lesson, Lulu announced in exasperation that she was giving up and stomped off.

"Get back to the piano now," I ordered.

"You can't make me."

"Oh yes, I can."

Back at the piano, Lulu made me pay. She punched, thrashed and kicked. She grabbed the music score and tore it to shreds. I taped the score back together and encased it in a plastic shield so that it could never be destroyed again. Then I hauled Lulu's dollhouse to the car and told her I'd donate it to the Salvation Army piece by piece if she didn't have "The Little White Donkey" perfect by the next day. When Lulu said, "I thought you were going to the Salvation Army, why are you still here?" I threatened her with no lunch, no dinner, no Christmas or Hanukkah presents, no birthday parties for two, three, four years. When she still kept playing it wrong, I told her she was purposely working herself into a frenzy because she was secretly afraid she couldn't do it. I told her to stop being lazy, cowardly, self-indulgent and pathetic.

Jed took me aside. He told me to stop insulting Lulu—which I wasn't even doing, I was just motivating her—and that he didn't think threatening Lulu was helpful. Also, he said, maybe Lulu really just couldn't do the technique—perhaps she didn't have the coordination yet—had I considered that possibility?

"You just don't believe in her," I accused.

"That's ridiculous," Jed said scornfully. "Of course I do."

"Sophia could play the piece when she was this age."

"But Lulu and Sophia are different people," Jed pointed out.

"Oh no, not this," I said, rolling my eyes. "Everyone is special in their special own way," I mimicked sarcastically. "Even losers are special in their own special way. Well don't worry, you don't have to lift a finger. I'm willing to put in as long as it takes, and I'm happy to be the one hated. And you can be the one they adore because you make them pancakes and take them to Yankees games."

I rolled up my sleeves and went back to Lulu. I used every weapon and tactic I could think of. We worked right through dinner into the night, and I wouldn't let Lulu get up, not for water, not even to go to the bathroom. The house became a war zone, and I lost my voice yelling, but still there seemed to be only negative progress, and even I began to have doubts.

Then, out of the blue, Lulu did it. Her hands suddenly came together—her right and left hands each doing their own imperturbable thing—just like that.

Lulu realized it the same time I did. I held my breath. She tried it tentatively again. Then she played it more confidently and faster, and still the rhythm held. A moment later, she was beaming.

"Mommy, look—it's easy!" After that, she wanted to play the piece over and over and wouldn't leave the piano. That night, she came to sleep in my bed, and we snuggled and hugged, cracking each other up. When she performed "The Little White Donkey" at a recital a few weeks later, parents came up to me and said, "What a perfect piece for Lulu—it's so spunky and soher."t

Even Jed gave me credit for that one. Western parents worry a lot about their children's self-esteem. But as a parent, one of the worst things you can do for your child's self-esteem is to let them give up. On the flip side, there's nothing better for building confidence than learning you can do something you thought you couldn't.

There are all these new books out there portraying Asian mothers as scheming, callous, overdriven people indifferent to their kids' true interests. For their part, many Chinese secretly believe that they care more about their children and are willing to sacrifice much more for them than Westerners, who seem perfectly content to let their children turn out badly. I think it's a misunderstanding on both sides. All decent parents want to do what's best for their children. The Chinese just have a totally different idea of how to do that.

Western parents try to respect their children's individuality, encouraging them to pursue their true passions, supporting their choices, and providing positive reinforcement and a nurturing environment. By contrast, the Chinese believe that the best way to protect their children is by preparing them for the future, letting them see what they're capable of, and arming them with skills, work habits and inner confidence that no one can ever take away.

—Amy Chua is a professor at Yale Law School and author of "Day of Empire" and "World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability." This essay is excerpted from "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother" by Amy Chua, to be published Tuesday by the Penguin Press, a member of Penguin Group (USA) Inc. Copyright © 2011 by Amy Chua.

Good read: Dr Pepper Campaign Features Hunt for ‘Unbelievable’ Characters via @nytimes

Now, a new campaign, which is taking place only online, is centered on “unbelievable” characters like Santa Claus, the Easter bunny and the tooth fairy. The campaign invites consumers to search various sections of Yahoo to find the characters and qualify for a sweepstakes.

The campaign, called the Hunt for the Unbelievable, is based on a series of animated television commercials for Diet Dr Pepper, sold by the Dr Pepper Snapple Group. The premise of the commercials is that a Diet Dr Pepper delivery man finds himself the newest member of a support group called “I Exist!”

In one commercial, the Diet Dr Pepper Guy, as the brand character is known, is questioned at a meeting by the other members of the group because he wants “people to believe there’s a satisfying diet drink.”

“Well, good luck with that one, bud,” Santa Claus says, laughing, as the other characters join in. In addition to Santa, the Easter bunny and the tooth fairy, the sessions are attended by Seamus the leprechaun, an alien and Sasquatch.

(Sasquatch in two campaigns at once? He is as busy as Eminem was on Super Bowl Sunday, with roles in commercials for the Chrysler 200 and Lipton Brisk.)

The Diet Dr Pepper commercials, which carry the theme “unbelievably satisfying,” are created by Deutsch L.A., which is the Marina del Rey, Calif., office of Deutsch, part of the Lowe & Partners Worldwide unit of the Interpublic Group of Companies.

Yahoo is producing the rich-media ads for its campaign with PointRoll. And Yahoo is producing the sweepstakes — to win an “unbelievably satisfying” trip worth $10,000, which the winner will create herself or himself — with Promotions.com.

The campaign on yahoo.com began on Jan. 18 and is scheduled to run through March 31. The budget is being estimated at $700,000 to $900,000.

The campaign is indicative of the increasing interest among marketers in having online versions of ads that run in traditional media like television, radio, magazines and newspapers. Not long ago, that mostly meant uploading video clips to Web sites that were repurposed from TV commercials.

But consumers have become less willing to watch something online that they have already watched on television. An exception is Super Bowl commercials, and even then, the online versions of Super Bowl spots are longer or contain new material like deleted scenes and outtakes.

“We have a very successful television campaign featuring these ‘unbelievable’ characters,” says Dave Fleming, director of marketing for Dr Pepper at the Dr Pepper Snapple Group in Plano, Tex.

“Our challenge is how do we evolve it,” he adds, and “give our consumers something a little different that extends the campaign.”

“Online is a great place,” Mr. Fleming says, because it enables Diet Dr Pepper to “be specific and target” the brand’s primary buyers, who are women ages 25 to 39.

And a campaign on a Web site can cost significantly less than producing commercials for TV and buying time to run them.

The Diet Dr Pepper campaign is also an example of how marketers are seeking to extend conventional ads into new realms and interactive formats.

“Yahoo has a long track record of delivering positive business results” for the Dr Pepper Snapple Group, says Robert Stone, director of interactive for the company.

Those results include raising awareness for new products, he adds, and of course sales growth.

The Dr Pepper Snapple Group holds an annual “upfront” market for media companies, during which they can present ideas for various brands in the corporate portfolio. They include, in addition to Diet Dr Pepper, Dr Pepper and Snapple, beverages like Canada Dry, Mott’s, 7Up and Sunkist.

“Yahoo came to the table with the best creativity and best way of reaching our consumer,” Mr. Stone says.

In the case of online media, “we don’t look for click-through, we look for engagement,” he adds. “With Yahoo, we’re getting one more way a consumer can interact with our brand.”

The set-up for the Hunt for the Unbelievable, at dietdrpepperhunt.yahoo.com, begins with this explanation: “The members of ‘I Exist!’ support group have gone missing. Help Diet Dr Pepper Guy find them, and you’ll be entered for a chance to win an unbelievably satisfying getaway!”

There are prompts next to the text that invite potential players to share the game with friends through e-mail, Facebook or Twitter.

The six mythical characters also appear alongside the text. Rolling over each image tells the computer user which of six sections of yahoo.com to search for each character.

The alien can be found on the Yahoo news section. The Easter bunny is on Yahoo games. The leprechaun is on Yahoo music.

Santa Claus can be found on Yahoo TV. Sasquatch is on Yahoo movies. And the tooth fairy can be found on Yahoo Shine, a section devoted to topics of interest to women.

Those searching for the characters on the appropriate sections of Yahoo will discover that in each case, the character turns up on a page of special related content.

Filed under  //   media   public relations   social media  

Amazeballs ... er, I mean, what? "New Padded Manties Make Men Look Better Endowed" via @nymag

loose threads

New Padded Manties Make Men Look Better Endowed; Adam Kimmel Is Collaborating With Carhartt

New Padded Manties Make Men Look Better Endowed; Adam Kimmel Is Collaborating With Carhartt

Photo: Courtesy of Andrew Christian

• Designer Andrew Christian is taking padded manties to the next level with Shock Jock briefs, which come equipped with “a soft hidden cup, sculpted into a penis shape (available in black or white models!), that adds around 2 inches to guy's frontal measurement." [Jezebel]

• Courtney Love is being sued by fashion designer Dawn Simorangkir over some defamatory tweets that Simorangkir claims hurt her career. [Vogue UK]

• Workwear brand Carhartt is partnering with Adam Kimmel on a co-branded menswear line that will be sold at Barneys and specialty stores in May. The collection includes lots of flannel and cotton twill, along with cashmere beanies for the discerning woodsman. [WWD]

• Spanx is rolling out a Mama Spanx maternity line, to help smooth out those unsightly baby bumps. [Jezebel]

• Online holiday sales were up 12.1 percent this year, and market researchers think it's mostly thanks to free shipping. [WWD]

• Lady Gaga dined at Marea on Tuesday night, wearing a sleeveless black leather jacket and no bra. [Page Six/NYP]

• Rihanna’s topless GQ cover was the magazine’s best-selling issue of 2010, while Taylor Lautner’s fared the worst. [WWD]

• Kate Middleton got the Andy Warhol treatment on the cover of Tatler’s February issue. [Catwalk Queen]

• Adidas and Diesel are launching a limited-edition line of sneakers with details like camel leather patches and reflector strips. [WWD]

 

I feel weird about this: Starbucks Gives Logo a New Look via @ABCNews

Starbucks Corp. is giving its siren a facelift.

The world's largest coffee company unveiled a new logo Wednesday that drops the words encircling its iconic sea nymph and gives her a few subtle updates.

Starbucks says the changes amount to more than nips and tucks to its favorite lady. The fresh look goes with a new direction for the company as it makes its way back from its toughest times in its 40-year history.

Prior versions of the logo helped build Starbucks into one of the world's best recognized brands, and the company felt it no longer needed to reinforce its name at every turn. The new wordless logo also is better suited to the company's expansion beyond coffee into a wider array of business lines and into more international markets.

Starbucks revealed the logo Wednesday to a cheering crowd of employees in its Seattle offices and on a webcast and plans to bring it to stores in March to coincide with the company's 40th anniversary.


This is the fourth version of Starbucks' logo since the company's beginnings as a small coffee, tea and spice shop in Seattle in 1971. The first update came in 1987, taking the original bare-breasted siren in brown to a more stylized — and modest — version in green as the company began to expand. The image was further refined in the 1990s as the company went public and its growth soared."What is really important here is an evolutionary refinement of the logo, which is a mirror image of the strategy," said Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks. "This is not just, let's wake up one day and change our logo."

Starbucks eventually suffered from its own success. It grew too far, too fast and began drawing criticism that it had become the Wal-Mart of coffee. Its luster further faded as the recession hit and consumers drank coffee at home or went to lower-priced competitors like McDonald's Corp., which had upped their coffee offerings. The coffee's giant's sales and stock price both fell.

Starbucks brought back founder Schultz to lead daily operations in 2008, closed hundreds of stores and cut jobs. It reemphasized training for employees, allowed customers to customize drinks more, opened stores with more local flavor, increased its Wi-Fi offerings and launched a rewards program.

Its sales have rebounded, and its fiscal 2010 profit was more than double what it earned in 2009.


The company also expanded its product lines — introducing Via, its first instant coffee. It increased its emphasis on beans, ice cream and other packaged goods sold in grocery stores. And it put a big push on its other business lines like Tazo tea and Seattle's Best Coffee. Starbucks ramped up its plans for international markets, like China, where it now has 400 stores on the mainland and plans to open hundreds more in coming years."We learned the hard way two and a half years ago that we have to earn it every day," Schultz told employees Wednesday.

"We're sitting today with record revenue, record profit; the stock price is at a five-year high. This isn't an accident," Schultz said.

Starbucks leaders say the changes to the logo are in some ways a metaphor for the company dropping the boundaries of its own business and growing into new areas. Marketing experts agree.

"The brand is now evolving to a point where the coffee association is too confining and restrictive," said John Quelch, a marketing professor at Harvard Business School. "Starbucks is fundamentally selling an experience, but by no means is coffee the only part of the experience. It is important that they not have a logo that is too confining."

Starbucks looked to companies like Nike Inc. and Apple Inc., which had earned the clout with consumers to drop the words from their logos. And it closely watched the missteps of others, such as Gap Inc., which launched a new logo in October only to withdraw it after harsh criticism by customers and others.

Starbucks sees other changes ahead under its new banner: it's testing a system for customers to order and pay for coffee by mobile phone. It's seeking a way for rewards card holders to earn points buying Starbucks products at grocers or other stores. And it's considering offering beer and wine at night in some of its cafes. Starbucks also suggested it is looking at new food business opportunities, though company officials would not disclose details.

"I've never been more excited about the future of the company, I'll tell you that," Schultz said.

————

Retail writer Michael A. Lee contributed reporting from New York.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

I just don't know ... your thoughts?

Filed under  //   marketing   public relations  

Good Read via @nytimes: The Benefits of Exercising Before Breakfast #exercise #health

Ian Spanier/Getty Images

The holiday season brings many joys and, unfortunately, many countervailing dietary pitfalls. Even the fittest and most disciplined of us can succumb, indulging in more fat and calories than at any other time of the year. The health consequences, if the behavior is unchecked, can be swift and worrying. A recent study by scientists in Australia found that after only three days, an extremely high-fat, high-calorie diet can lead to increased blood sugar and insulin resistance, potentially increasing the risk for Type 2 diabetes. Waistlines also can expand at this time of year, prompting self-recrimination and unrealistic New Year’s resolutions.

But a new study published in The Journal of Physiology suggests a more reliable and far simpler response. Run or bicycle before breakfast. Exercising in the morning, before eating, the study results show, seems to significantly lessen the ill effects of holiday Bacchanalias.

Phys Ed

For the study, researchers in Belgium recruited 28 healthy, active young men and began stuffing them with a truly lousy diet, composed of 50 percent fat and 30 percent more calories, overall, than the men had been consuming. Some of the men agreed not to exercise during the experiment. The rest were assigned to one of two exercise groups. The groups’ regimens were identical and exhausting. The men worked out four times a week in the mornings, running and cycling at a strenuous intensity. Two of the sessions lasted 90 minutes, the others, an hour. All of the workouts were supervised, so the energy expenditure of the two groups was identical.

Their early-morning routines, however, were not. One of the groups ate a hefty, carbohydrate-rich breakfast before exercising and continued to ingest carbohydrates, in the form of something like a sports drink, throughout their workouts. The second group worked out without eating first and drank only water during the training. They made up for their abstinence with breakfast later that morning, comparable in calories to the other group’s trencherman portions.

The experiment lasted for six weeks. At the end, the nonexercising group was, to no one’s surprise, super-sized, having packed on an average of more than six pounds. They had also developed insulin resistance — their muscles were no longer responding well to insulin and weren’t pulling sugar (or, more technically, glucose) out of the bloodstream efficiently — and they had begun storing extra fat within and between their muscle cells. Both insulin resistance and fat-marbled muscles are metabolically unhealthy conditions that can be precursors of diabetes.

The men who ate breakfast before exercising gained weight, too, although only about half as much as the control group. Like those sedentary big eaters, however, they had become more insulin-resistant and were storing a greater amount of fat in their muscles.

Only the group that exercised before breakfast gained almost no weight and showed no signs of insulin resistance. They also burned the fat they were taking in more efficiently. “Our current data,” the study’s authors wrote, “indicate that exercise training in the fasted state is more effective than exercise in the carbohydrate-fed state to stimulate glucose tolerance despite a hypercaloric high-fat diet.”

Just how exercising before breakfast blunts the deleterious effects of overindulging is not completely understood, although this study points toward several intriguing explanations. For one, as has been known for some time, exercising in a fasted state (usually possible only before breakfast), coaxes the body to burn a greater percentage of fat for fuel during vigorous exercise, instead of relying primarily on carbohydrates. When you burn fat, you obviously don’t store it in your muscles. In “our study, only the fasted group demonstrated beneficial metabolic adaptations, which eventually may enhance oxidative fatty acid turnover,” said Peter Hespel, Ph.D., a professor in the Research Center for Exercise and Health at Catholic University Leuven in Belgium and senior author of the study.

At the same time, the fasting group showed increased levels of a muscle protein that “is responsible for insulin-stimulated glucose transport in muscle and thus plays a pivotal role in regulation of insulin sensitivity,” Dr Hespel said.

In other words, working out before breakfast directly combated the two most detrimental effects of eating a high-fat, high-calorie diet. It also helped the men avoid gaining weight.

There are caveats, of course. Exercising on an empty stomach is unlikely to improve your performance during that workout. Carbohydrates are easier for working muscles to access and burn for energy than fat, which is why athletes typically eat a high-carbohydrate diet. The researchers also don’t know whether the same benefits will accrue if you exercise at a more leisurely pace and for less time than in this study, although, according to Leonie Heilbronn, Ph.D., a professor at the University of Adelaide in Australia, who has extensively studied the effects of high-fat diets and wrote a commentary about the Belgian study, “I would predict low intensity is better than nothing.”

So, unpleasant as the prospect may be, set your alarm after the next Christmas party to wake you early enough that you can run before sitting down to breakfast. “I would recommend this,” Dr. Heilbronn concluded, “as a way of combating Christmas” and those insidiously delectable cookies.

Good to read some science behind this theory.

Filed under  //   training  

Great Read: A Brand's Best Bet in Social Media Is Randomness via @AdAge - Digital

Digital

Stay on top of the news, sign up for our free newsletters

When It Comes to Facebook, Relevance May Be Redefined

To Create Conversation, Simple, Random and Banal May Be a Brand's Best Bets

by Matthew Creamer
Published: November 29, 2010

NEW YORK (AdAge.com) -- May 4, as you may or may not know, is National Star Wars Day, a fact recognized by no less august bodies than the Los Angeles City Council and the Church of Jediism, a George Lucas-inspired denomination that counts itself as the fourth-largest church in the United Kingdom. This year the occasion was also marked by the folks at BlackBerry, who updated their corporate Twitter account to read "May the 4th Be With You."

What does BlackBerry have to do with Star Wars? Not much, other than selling an app that turns your Torch or Tour into a faux light saber. But that didn't stop the tweet from being one of the company's most effective -- a phenomenon Brian Wallace, VP-global digital at BlackBerry parent Research In Motion, had to try to explain to colleagues.

Oreo strikes a balance between promotion and chat on Facebook.

Oreo strikes a balance between promotion and chat on Facebook.

--> "I remember getting emails from my peers asking me why we would post such a thing and was this why we created our Twitter channel," he wrote in an email interview. "My response was that this post reached over 150,000 people, 98% of the posts were positive, most tweets made a positive association with our brand, and it drove a 15% increase in our followers. Now what's the value of all that to our company? For the cost of $0.00 we have increased positive brand sentiment, generated a measurable earned-media value and now have 20,000+ more people who I can share product-related information to. Not a bad ROI."

Redefining relevance
Marketing executives all over the world are having experiences not dissimilar to Mr. Wallace's. Relevance has long been a central tenet of effective advertising, but the rise of Facebook and Twitter are forcing a redefinition of the term. As it turns out, many people in social networks don't want to talk about your product, they just want to talk. We've long known that inserting brands into social-media channels requires a conversational touch, but many are surprised by just how conversational. There's increasing evidence that the most-effective kinds of marketing communications on these websites are simple, random, even banal statements or questions driven by the calendar or the whim of a writer that may not have anything to do with the brand in question.

What are you doing this weekend? What is your ideal vacation? What's your favorite movie or book? On Veteran's Day, BlackBerry posted a simple holiday-related message that received nearly 8,000 likes and more than 500 comments, many of which consisted of veterans thanking the brand and posting their PINs, allowing others to contact them via BlackBerry messenger. Reaction to that update far outpaced other recent ones concerned with products or tips.

It's never been particularly easy or cheap to get 8,000 people to do anything for a brand, but Twitter and Facebook may be changing that. "We're so used to advertising and marketing being highly reviewed, high-production-quality creative on which you spend a lot of money and time, and there's a whole flow built on creating and approving it, said Michael Lazerow, CEO of Buddy Media. "All the sudden, a very simple question, like 'What's your favorite movie?' is engaging your customers and that's your creative. People say 'Whoa.'"

With more than 500 million people on Facebook and Twitter closing in on 200 million users, "stream marketing," as Mr. Lazerow describes it, will be crucial. What goes into those ceaseless rivers, alongside updates and content from friends, said Mr. Lazerow, "is some of the most powerful and important creative that we're going to be dealing with." On the part of the writers, that requires a different ability that's far from what's been traditionally needed in marketing. Said Mr. Wallace, "You need to be skilled at understanding how a seemingly random-type message can -- in the end -- contribute to the company brand and/or behavioral objectives."

Content should lean toward conversational
Mr. Lazerow, whose company makes tools that help brands manage their Facebook presences, estimates that roughly two-thirds of a company's Facebook content should be conversational in nature. The exact ratio, however, depends on what it's trying to achieve. While there's no across-the-board data on how conversational posts compare to promotional ones, he said the evidence is clear. He pointed me to a few different examples on Facebook where those conversational posts produce eight to 12 times the response of more brand-oriented ones. "It's not always about your brand," he said. "It's about why people are there to connect with other people, [gettng them] to connect with you because they like you. The numbers speak for themselves."

Oreo is masterful in handling that balance between promotion and conversation. Consider the responses from several recent questions:

  • "Ever try dunking an Oreo cookie with a fork or anything else?" 8,200 likes and 2,300 comments
  • "Pick a flavor, any flavor! If you could create a new Oreo cream flavor, what would it be?" 7,100 likes, 12,500 comments
  • "Pop quiz: Twist, lick, then..." 6,500 likes, 6,200 comments

In case you're wondering, these numbers aren't far off what posts on Lady Gaga's page might do. Not bad for a 98-year-old cookie brand. Oreo's Facebook fan base has grown by 3 million since late October, giving it over 15 million fans. It's one of three brands, along with Coke and Starbucks, to penetrate a top 25 dominated by celebrities, entertainment properties and Texas Hold Em Poker.

The Kraft cookie's Facebook presence originates from a department at the digital agency 360i, which, with a dozen writers who work off pre-planned editorial calendar, is as organized as any publication and is now bigger than many. That department reaches more than 30 million fans across a long list of brands, including Coca-Cola, JC Penney, Lysol and Jell-O. Those writers typically have experience talking to people on behalf of brands, often as community managers in non-social network settings.

Inspire feedback
"When you have ad agencies or copywriters writing your Facebook copy, it ends up being promotional in nature and if you're not inspiring feedback no one's going to care," said Sarah Hofstetter, senior VP-emerging media and brand strategy at 360i. "You can only talk about your product so much. Balance that with you're not trying to be their best friend, you're trying to achieve some marketing objective."

For Oreo, as Ms. Hofstetter explains it, those objectives are both fan-base growth and engagement on the page. For other clients, it's a whole different thing. Bravo, for instance, is interested in clicks and views of the videos of its shows. BlackBerry's Mr. Wallace said that success is about getting likes, or shares, or comments. Or maybe the person will click on an ad or post a photo or video he or she took with a BlackBerry.

"In the end it's behavior-based," said Mr. Wallace. "A Facebook fan has no value. Getting a Facebook fan to do something does."

Stay on top of the news and stay ahead of the game—sign up for e-mail newsletters now!

So Interesting: With a Little Help From His Friends | Culture | via @VanityFairMag

Sean Parker was sitting in World Civilization class at his Virginia high school when someone brought him a note. His father, it read, was waiting to take him to an orthodontist appointment. A chill ran down Parker’s spine. He didn’t have an orthodontist. When he got outside, his father angrily whisked him into the family minivan. When they arrived at their modest suburban house, a team of F.B.I. agents was toting papers and a desktop computer out of Sean’s room.

Within a few short years, Parker went from apprehended 16-year-old hacker—he had managed to break into the computer networks of numerous multi-national corporations and even military databases—to world-class Internet entrepreneur. In 1999 he became rather notorious, at 19, for helping an even younger teenager named Shawn Fanning create Napster. That free song-sharing service upended the music industry. More recently, Parker played an indispensable role as the founding president of Facebook, the mammoth social-networking site where 500 million people now spend 700 billion minutes a month. Had he not joined founder Mark Zuckerberg in Palo Alto in the summer of 2004, when the fledgling Facebook was just five months old, the service almost certainly would not be the colossus it is today.

Parker is widely considered a Web oracle; more than a few acquaintances and colleagues use the word “genius” to describe him. He understands not only computers and Web networks but also how people want to incorporate them into their lives. As a result, he’s been stunningly successful. That said, he has a libertine side. Parker has a knack for missing deadlines and appointments, for disappearing for weeks on end, for avoiding the press. (His decision to cooperate with a Vanity Fair profile is unprecedented and rather out of character.) He was pushed out of Facebook after an arrest for cocaine possession in 2005. (No charges were filed.) Even among his many supporters, he has a reputation for being an erratic party animal.

Now he is about to achieve a new level of fame, as one of the main subjects of the highly anticipated film The Social Network. In theaters this month, the movie purports to tell the story of Facebook’s first year, partly by focusing on a darker side of Parker’s persona. Justin Timberlake plays a suave, conniving Parker, who both in the movie and in reality was Zuckerberg’s main mentor during Facebook’s crucial early days. But as crafted by screenwriter Aaron Sorkin, Parker comes across as a pushy, greedy—and, yes, visionary—schemer. “A million dollars isn’t cool,” Parker says at one point in the movie. “You know what’s cool? A billion dollars.” Zuckerberg, played by Jesse Eisenberg (see page 189), comes across as cocky, angry, and somewhat sex-obsessed.

The real Parker is both more complex and more interesting, despite the considerable skills of Sorkin and director David Fincher. In fact, Parker, a svelte, wavy-maned clotheshorse, is a uniquely quirky figure in the annals of 21st-century business. At age 30, he is already worth close to a billion dollars, thanks mostly to the cache of Facebook stock he still owns. An autodidact who barely finished high school, he is nonetheless almost painfully cerebral. A sickly child whose asthma sometimes landed him in the hospital, he devoured books from a very young age; his father, a U.S.-government oceanographer, began teaching him programming at age seven. There is hardly a topic—literary, political, medical, or technological—about which he cannot offer an informed and nuanced opinion in his rapid-fire patter. (Don’t get him started on Ben Franklin’s role as a media pioneer.)

Most of all, he turns his knowledge and instincts toward Internet business strategy as a way, he says, of “re-architecting society. It’s technology, not business or government, that’s the real driving force behind large-scale societal shifts.” Indeed, Parker has such a superb track record for predicting where technology is headed (and which type of product and service will appeal to consumers) that companies often invite him to invest simply to tap his brain. “Few people are as smart as he is,” says Facebook’s Zuckerberg, aged 26, who still consults quite frequently with his former partner.

But, for all his Web-world savvy, Parker at times seems just as drawn to recreational indulgence. His is the life of programmer-as-rock-star—often spent among real-life rock stars—with the lifestyle that that implies. He routinely stays up very, very late, talking intensely about subjects he cares about and/or partying—and sleeps in much of the following day. Says San Francisco tech investor Ron Conway, a longtime friend, “The fact that Sean is so scattered yet so brilliant is something you just don’t see often. He’ll probably start another five really significant life-changing companies before he’s through.”

Parker’s high-school hacking bust seems itself cinematic: a down-home version of a Matthew Broderick scene from WarGames. The teenager had been sitting in the family den, all night, drilling deeply into the bowels of a Fortune 500 company, which he refuses to name. Back then he had a hobby, he says, of hacking into different sorts of organizations, keeping a file of .com, .edu, .mil, and .gov Internet domains he had penetrated in various countries around the world. His goal was to break into one of each type in a laundry list of countries. He claims that once inside he usually alerted the system administrator—from his or her own e-mail—to vulnerabilities he had discovered.

Unfortunately, after this particular night, his father came downstairs at five A.M. Parker had been performing erratically in high school—sometimes pulling A’s but just as often simply refusing to work, and nearly failing. It was all deliberate, he claims. “I had a desire to prove to myself that I was actually in control—that I wasn’t a puppet,” he says. “I didn’t want to kowtow to the system.” Seeing his son hunched over his terminal, Parker’s father, outraged, apparently had a vision of yet another lost day at school. “So,” recalls Parker, “he grabbed the keyboard from my hands, ripped it out of the computer, and took it upstairs. I started crying and saying, ‘Dad! You don’t know what you’re doing! I have to log out!’ But he didn’t let me.” Unable to cover his tracks, Sean Parker’s dalliances were exposed, his location identified by tracking him through his Internet-service provider. In the end, as a minor, he was sentenced only to community service.

But one aspect of this story may help elucidate Parker’s subsequent attitudes toward rebellion. He performed his court-ordered duties at a library with other teenage offenders. There he met a girl whom he describes as a “punk-rock princess.” One day she wrote her phone number on Parker’s hand—in ballpoint pen, he remembers fondly—and a few months later, he says, “I lost my virginity to her.” He explains: “I thought it was an incredible cosmic irony. This was the most romantic experience of my life and I met her because I’d been raided by the F.B.I.”

Around the same time, Parker made the online acquaintance of 15-year-old Shawn Fanning, another talented hacker. Fanning recalls their first conversation. “Right away we were talking about things like theoretical physics. We realized we had a lot in common.” Along with a couple of buddies, the pair soon launched an Internet-security firm called Crosswalk, offering to advise companies that might otherwise have been their targets. It didn’t succeed. Parker, meanwhile, began working as a programmer at a major Internet company near his Virginia home, receiving academic credit during his senior year.

Against his parents’ wishes, Parker decided not to apply to college, and when Fanning told him about his plan to create Napster, he immediately asked to get involved, becoming a co-founder and contributing key ideas. He picked up and moved to San Francisco, having never before spent any time away from home, says his mother, Diane, a TV-advertising broker.

In its first year, the music file-sharing network gained tens of millions of enthusiasts. Parker soon became a habitué of nightclubs and raves. But in the process Napster drew the wrath of record companies, which launched an all-out legal assault. Within 14 months, a federal judge would order Napster to stop allowing users to download copyrighted material. E-mails that Parker had written, blithely discussing the likelihood that users were breaking the law, were enlarged and displayed in open court by industry attorneys. Though an appeals judge let the service keep operating, it was the beginning of Napster’s long, slow death. Parker himself was pushed out by Fanning’s more elderly partners. Thus began a cycle of vertiginous triumph followed by humiliating failure.