Brand sponsor + Event= Success? Maybe...but for who?

Nick McGlynn's Obliterati party is being sponsored by CitySearch next Thursday. 

I'm a supporter of this event and it always gets rave reviews (even though it conflicts with Digital DUMBO every month ahem ahem :) )And as an organizer of a networking event, I understand that sponsorship will probably help with drink costs and specials are always a plus. Way to go Nick. I just wonder what the motivation is from the CitySearch standpoint?

• To be associated with the hip New York tech savvy scene?
• Get them to review the bar and comment on the CitySearch site? (That's what Yelp is for. Not Citysearch in my opinion)

What's in it for CitySearch? 

When brands come in to sponsor events, there is usually a goal. So for example, when Citysearch competitor Yelp does their special events, the goal is for those Yelp Elite that attended the event to go back and  review the event, tying back into the whole community site and vibe. (Plus, the venue now has a set of fresh eyes in their space in hopes that they'll come back.) Or, when Pepsi hosted the Brooklyn Bowl event a few weeks back for the new Mountain Dew, they had a specific goal of reaching a targeted audience that would enjoy that venue and interact with the brand in the way they wanted.

Brands can come in and throw money at many types of events. For the most part, I would confidently say that it's accepted by the organizer if it's going to help with costs, buzz, etc...but from a planning view, you also want to make sure that the sponsor ties into the overall theme of your event.

What do you think?

Breaking News on Twitter-some thoughts

So Mashable posted today two breaking sports stories that were first "heard" on Twitter. News outlets now are afraid to be scooped by others that they immediately post to Twitter and THEN follow up with a longer post with the details. They listed the benefits to breaking first on Twitter including the amount of awareness you gain, less chance of being scooped, etc...

I'm all for this. A quick "post on the go" with follow up later on the details once you have time to read it is awesome. For people that are busy, sometimes just knowing the headline of the news is good to keep going. 

But, I also thought of something else.

In a meeting this week iLike came up and I had remembered seeing on my Twitter feed that MySpace was in talks to buy it for $20 million "or something." (News later reported it was official.) While the news was insightful for those in the room that didn't know, not having further details left a lot of open questions. Questions that I wish I had the answers to. 

So, what's the ideal? 

• Waiting for the full story to provide the details and get everything right?
  
• Quick post on Twitter in fear of not being the first to break it. (Doesn't this also remind you of those blogs like Perez Hilton where people comment to only try and be FIRST?)
• A combination of the two? But then what would that happ medium be?

I don't have a full opinion on this because I can't decide what I think works best.

What do you think?

Update

I'm not one to take a break. Honestly, I need to do it more and my recent vacation proved that after multiple people commented on how happy I looked in pictures and in person. (Note to self: Hawaii looks lovely. How much are flights?)

In other happenings, I completed my first half marathon today. It was 95 degrees out. I may have almost passed out but damn did it feel good in the end running through the streets of New York.

And, for the most exciting news, (that I've already announced but want to put on here) I have a new job! I start at Attention tomorrow as a Director for the Consumer group. I'm beyond excited. Check out the first blog post on the Attention blog here and continue to check it out for more content from me and my awesome colleagues.

Plan B

Just in case this whole digital/social media/online trend goes away, we all need a backup plan. I don't have one yet, but I do like this quote from David Sable, vice chairman-chief operating officer at WPP's Wunderman:

"And if all else fails, there is plan B. My contingency plan is to open a falafel stand. There's always a market for that."

David if you need a backup chef or a girl to hold out free samples on the street I'm your girl. Although honestly, I immediately thought to give this new falafel stand a Twitter account. So yea, I don't see this digital stuff going anywhere yet.

Read the full article here from AdAge about why the ad industry won't be doing that well in the second half of 2009. Good thing that PR has an optimistic view about them.

General Public Stalker is the new Celebrity Stalker

Out to dinner for a very close friend's birthday downtown. Small place with about 25 people in it total. There was an urge to take photos of our perfectly made margaritas, the great presentation of the nachos and the laughing friends lit by the candlelight. The birthday cake bought by another friend for the lady of the evening comes out almost the size of her head. Instantly, I whip out my iPhone and snap the picture, posting it to Tumblr for all to see that 1)it's my best friends birthday 2)look at the size of the cake! 3)to share a little bit about what I'm doing that night and to document. Harmless.

On the other side of the bar there is a girl with a few friends wearing a leotard over her jeans. Not an uber fashionista, I'm not one to usually gawk at an outfit but she was also dancing around like crazy and making a bit of a small scene. The entire table couldn't stop staring at her and her unusual antics dancing around the bar. I immediately tried to snap another photo to share it. Why? WHY NOT.

Posting photos of your friends is OK and most of mine expect it now. When I take a picture on my phone I usually get the "is that going on your blog?" question. Sometimes it does, sometimes most of the time it doesn't. Obviously some friends will say "Don't tag me in that!" I do the same. But with strangers, I don't offer them the opportunity to tell me to not post it and that's kind of bad because honestly, I don't want people posting me without my knowing.(Note-I don't think people would. Don't think I'm tooting my own horn here) In fact, my posting that photo of the girl (I didn't) could have ended up crossing blog paths with someone else I know, causing an uncomfortable situation and so on.

So, where's the line?

An article in yesterday's New York Times about banning photos and tweets at certain bars and restaurants made sense to me. No one wants to go to dinner and have to worry about getting their photo taken by an unknown because they like your shoes or your bag, or if you're lucky enough to be joined by a famous dinner date. You go to dinner to enjoy the meal and the company.

But, while that is a strong view of mine, I also like hearing about celebrity sightings at local stops. Example: A friend sat next to Matthew Broderick at a coffee shop a few weeks ago and my instant reaction was "Why didn't you take a picture?!" Sure, the picture would have been of the back of his head or maybe a blurry action shot, but because of the current paparazzi state of the web, my instant reaction was to get proof and I wanted to see. I'll admit I enjoyed the days when Gawker Stalker was really popular and I keep an eye on OMGICU. I also understand it's a scary world for celebrities with stalkers and etc...

With the easy click of a button on a phone, the sense of annoyance of the paparazzi for celebrities also now applies to the normal person. As the article says, "On Facebook, “You have movie star issues, and you’re just a person,” she said." It's true. People take photos EVERYWHERE. Even when going on a recent vacation I asked my friend to not tag some of the photos and keep them private. It's the normal person's version of "No pictures please."

What do you think? Do you agree with the banning of photos being taken in the bars or should we all just accept that our lives are now in a fishbowl and we need to deal with it?