“The pressures on musicians to keep things simple are obvious,” writes Jon Pareles in the New York Times (1/2/11). “What have become all-too-familiar 21st-century refrains — too much information, too little time and the diminished attention spans that result from trying to cope — have only grown more insistent through the decade,” he continues. “The recording technology of loops and samples encourages unimaginative producers to repeat something merely adequate for the length of a song rather than developing or enriching it.” There are exceptions, of course, like Arcade Fire, for instance, but they are “holdouts and contrarians against … the pop song as little more than sound effect and sound bite.”

A hit, these days “adds up to little more than a dull, thumping Eurodisco beat and a robo-tuned voice repeating an inane hook, something like … Justin Bieber piping, ‘Baby, baby, baby,oh‘ or the Black Eyed Peas chanting ‘Imma Be’ more than 100 times …” The trend, says Jon, is not limited to pop; it’s afflicting indie-rock, too, where we might have “a beat straight out of an old girl-group record, some familiar doo-wop chords and songs like Best Coast’s rudimentary (but enjoyable) ‘I Want To,’ which repeatedly declares, without fear of ambiguity, ‘I want you so much’.” And when they fade, “there’s always another act with another gimmick and slogan, the next novelty offering instant gratification and a short shelf life.”

This might be attributable to the economic downturn and “listeners’ yearning for a danceable beat and an uncomplicated, upbeat message to propel them through hard times.” It could be because of incentives “to write songs around nuggets and generic sentiments that can be re-purposed as ad jingles, ring tones and soundtrack backgrounds.” Perhaps it’s a “corrective and a clarification, a reminder of primal pleasures and impulses, a knowing rejuvenation,” like punk in the ’70s, for instance. Or maybe it’s just that “brevity and digestibility make a song more functional, at least in the short run … Someone just might write the new ‘Wild Thing‘ or the new ‘Hey Ya!‘ Too often, however, less is merely less.”

But why do they need a one-pound printed catalog (mailed several times each year) nowadays? And why, on every page except four, is there no mention of a website? No URLs, just 1-800 copy.

These ULINE people must be nuts….or maybe their marketing people are pretty smart. Because you can engage the visitor to an extent on a website, but you can’t build a relationship. Obviously, ULINE wants the prospect to pick up the phone, and let the ULINE organization work on the rapport aspects.

The most important principal in attracting and maintaining customers is “Build the Relationship”. ULINE does it well. Do we? Do you?

Trying to reach people by phone takes extra time, and setting up a meeting is even worse. There’s “time overhead” to use these forms of communications vs. email, and they often stretch out beyond the time you’ve allocated for them. Use email to communicate small chunks or lists of information. On the flip side, negotiating an issue or collaborating on a work product is often more efficient done in real-time. If it’s gone back and forth via email more than a couple of times, pick up the phone Also, communicating by phone or in person help build rapport more than email — operating 100 percent digitally can make you seem cold and impersonal.

By Jeffrey L. Cohen

Read more: http://socialmediab2b.com/2010/06/b2b-apple-iphone-4-marketers/#ixzz0sY6zWwm0

You would think we would be a little more enlightened, but take a look at the graphic on the side of this truck that was delivering office furniture at my office building today. I don’t know about your office, but we don’t have many short-skirted, pretty women sitting on a desk, legs suggestively posed, doing nothing productive and with wine glass handy.

Or maybe we have been just doing it wrong for 30+ years. Any opinions?