Would You Like To Be An Editor?

I am writing a book about communication and the way in which new media has changed delivery and consumption of information.

It seems that there may be some value in the stuff I am writing about and (probably because I am going to ramble on anyway), I have been recommended by numerous people to write ‘a book’.

In an attempt to avoid a common mistake as we see when new businesses start up just because their friends tell them their idea rocks, I have listened and asked many people throughout this year about the potential demand for such a publication. Indeed, why have a publication at all? Surely this blog is sufficient.

Well – despite my love of a paperless office, it appears a physical product (containing this ‘Communication Ideal’ stuff) may have some value.

My mission in life is to have a positive effect in communication.

If this publication has any positive effect at all, it would make the hundreds of hours I have spent scribbling and the thousands of hours listening and learning to the public, peers, colleagues and mentors, all worthwhile.

What I (and any future readers of the scribbles) need is someone of your expertise to be able to point out any glaring points of nonsense and unnecessary rhetoric (my ability for which is arguably proven in this post alone) so they can be removed. Better still – but entirely optionally – any additions that you feel you would like to add.

Armed with the introductions of each chapter and some editors of integrity, I will approach some ‘warm’ publishers I have been singled out. There will be no editing required until a publisher is eager to proceed (unless of course the writing is so bad nobody will touch it until there has been intervention).

What’s in it for you?

Well, aside from the numerous name-checks and free publicity for your personal brand equity (!), I would like to offer you my services to use.

The ‘menu’ you can choose from is:

- Columnist/content provider on your site/blog/publication

- Workshop co-ordinator at an event of your choice

- An amount of consultancy, free of charge

- Event speaker at a conference/internal gathering

- Links and in-depth review of your site/product/service/software

Now obviously not all of these are of value (depending on your point of view) but hopefully one is and its entirely up to you what you choose!

Book details

The question of course is “How many words do you need to make a book?”

And as a wise man once answered, “As many as you need and not one more.”

Looking at the stats:

1. Malcolm Gladwell’s Book, Blink is a 70,731-word message.

2. Steve Farber’s Radical Leap tells the story in 33,825 words.

3. Seth Godin uses 30,655 words to describe a Purple Cow.

4. Stephen Covey needed 100,519 words to explain The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People.

5. It took David Allen 76,858 words to write his way of Getting Things Done.

6. Race Through the Forest, a fable, by Timothy Johnson needed only 18,508 words.

7. Writing White Papers by Michael A. Stelzner required only 38,664 words to do what was necessary.

8. Beyond Code by Rajesh Setty is about 30,000 words.

9. Robert Scoble and Shel Israel spent 78,994 words in Naked Conversations.

In my book, there are 9 chapters, each is around 3,000 words in length. But hey, quantity does not equal quality. That’s where you (hopefully) come in :)

The sections are:

1. Advertising Is Dead, Long Live Advertising

- Emergence of useful information, brilliant content and the re-definition of the term

2. It’s Time For A Re-think

- Sociological impact and consideration of personal brand communication

3. The Abolition Of Toleration

- When ‘putting up’ with irrelevance is no longer enough

4. Perception = Reality

- How a brand is translated from the boardroom to the community

5. The Advocacy Dial

- Power of recommendation and peer influence

6. The Rules Of Engagement

- How, why and when people engage emotionally with products and services

7. The Vaporframe

- Intrinsic links between the products and services individuals use, buy and advocate

8. Disruption quietly grows

- The rules of having no rules

9. The Communication Ideal

- Convergence of engagement methodology and its impact on the future

Once I have collected the editors (if any), and have secured some form of interest from a publisher, I will create an editors ‘lounge’ where you will be able to log in and edit documents as and when you desire.

You can email me at jonathanmacdonald dot com between now and the end of July 2008 – remember, you need do no more than show intent at this stage.

Thanks for your consideration

  • Andy
    Amazing. I'll add to favourites your blog. Do you want to write more about it?
  • Desiree
    No thing is around forever...but some things remain static...

    I find it slightly difficult to grasp your full thoughts completely, as a full picture that includes everything. There always seems to be more to connect...

    Us/Them - is human nature. Thats where we get stereotypes from...wars. There has always been war....will a paradigm shift get rid of that? I think the paradigm is more just the way consumerism works in general and the economy (when people don't buy the ecomony gets bad...but people can't keep buying more and more forever...what happens next..thats the paradigm)

    There are plenty of laymen who have much more common sense and acumen than scholars will ever have...(corresponding to the journalist thing).

    Do you find it interesting to speculate where websites will go, what will replace them?

    Yes, Gutenburg changed the world....did you ever read, "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman. He kind of debates the paradigm shift for communication mediums, spoken work, written word, tv, cell phone internet, whether the shift may be good or bad, or whether it is just different...how to use it to your advantage. Reminds me of the Stoopid article about google and commentary on that.

    Websites may be around forever...just like there are still public orators. It just might change or take on a different format. We will always need to get our information to us somehow. Newspapers may be losing suscribers...but will they always have a group subscribing, maybe.
  • Good comments - great thoughts!

    I feel that the beauty of evolution is that things that we cannot possibly imagine become possible.

    It is also important that we do not stop striving for ideals, especially whilst basing our opinion solely on what has gone before or is in the present.

    Paradigm shifts happen and I believe that the paradigm shift in the media industry will be as significant as Gutenberg's Movable Type back in 1440....and as we know now.....what people thought they could predict turned out to be categorically and monumentally different from what reality turned out to be.

    I feel the same about journalists who find it unbelievable that everyday people have the same if not more impact and readership passion - without being trained or paid.

    Hell - I know people that think that websites will be around forever - I mean puurleeease!
  • Desiree
    Technically we are all consumers. But, if a consumer decides to actively facilitate s/he is not just a consumer anymore. Maybe that is just semantics...My original reasoning was the vast amount of consumers advocating or speaking out against brands. Your comment about us as creators all being recognized as so made me think more about it...and I think that any creator could and should be recognized for what they produce, when there is something tangible that is produced....

    I see more and more brands becoming a more of a movement. Instead of being consumed on a wider scale because of campaigns, they are the product of natural "viral marketing." I think a few good examples of this may be the Ipod, Kindle, Prius, Arizona Tea...all of which did not originally and some still do not have many marketing dollars. I think I was just getting at the fact that in the future it will not be as easy to pin point "the creator" because it will be much more of a collaboration - between consumer & facilitor, between multiple consumers. But if a consumer comes up with some random video on YouTube...and it eventually ends up on network tv promoting a product, yes I think they should be awarded.

    I don't think that a divide is called for. I think it is alot healthier to have such collaborations in place. It is really good for the authenticity of the brand to have so many different types of advocates.

    When I think about it, it does seem weird to mesh us & them, but I feel as if this is socially ingrained in humans. There will always be an us & them. It will never just be us or we... Particularly in this case, we will always be trying to understand them in order to reach them and connect with them - their desires, wants, and needs - on a more intimate level to gain their loyalty, even if some of them join us by being recognized for creative that they have done or how they have personally campaigned for a brand.

    Think of it like this....someone campaigning for the face of the American Heart Association. An ordinary citizen answers a call to do something extraordinary because of life circumstances. They could become the face for that organization or cause. But, that person would most likely not win an award for marketing, though they actually do alot of the leg work for the campaign. Currently, "we" are the face of the product/brand for the client. That doesn't meant that others can't contribute into that bank of knowledge, in fact that is constantly occuring. But, since "we" create most of the wealth in the bank "we" are the ones recognized for it. I've always hated the us/them paradigm, unfortunately I believe it to be unavoidable.
  • Thanks for the comments Desiree.

    Interested to hear why you think that consumers and facilitators won’t win creative awards.

    Not picking holes in an encouraging response but I would love to see the reasoning here.

    If we are all creators, how can it be we cannot be recognised for being so? Or am I missing something?

    Do we need to keep some divide?

    To quote you: “I also think information space will become more and more inundated with consumer advertising (every comment about a brand is has the potential to be relavent, useful content)”

    I can only imagine it’s the ‘awards’ bit that you don’t see then as we seem to be saying similar things…

    Faced with the world it is today and for the last X years, it seems absurd to mesh ‘us’ and ‘them’ in recognition….however, I feel it is exactly that paradigm I speak of.

    What say you?
  • Thanks for the comments Desiree.

    Interested to hear what you think that consumers and facilitators won’t win creative awards.

    Not picking holes in an encouraging response but I would love to see the reasoning here.

    If we are all creators, how can it be we cannot be recognised for being so? Or am I missing something?

    Do we need to keep some divide?

    To quote you: “I also think information space will become more and more inundated with consumer advertising (every comment about a brand is has the potential to be relavent, useful content)”

    I can only imagine it’s the ‘awards’ bit that you don’t see then as we seem to be saying similar things…

    Faced with the world it is today and for the last X years, it seems absurd to mesh ‘us’ and ‘them’ in recognition….however, I feel it is exactly that paradigm I speak of.

    What say you?
  • Desiree
    It seems I missed the deadline to be an editor...I just read your comment on advertising 5.0 and wanted to look deeper into the ideas you were presenting. You seem to offer a more optimistic, less cynical view than other lengthy posters on AdAge which I find refreshing. My degree is in Integrative Marketing Communications and many of the ideas you mentioned are rooted in buried in ancient communication history.

    "The term advertising will no longer mean adverts, it will mean relevant, and useful content." - This tidbit was particularly insightful...somwhere along the line advertising and public relations were divided into seperate categories, along with branding, marketing, etc....as if they were all individual unique concepts. When in reality these "specialities" work together to produce a body of rhetoric that aims to persuade, much like famous orators of the past. The physical attributes of advertisings sectioned it off so that these connections have not been so readily seen in recent times.

    "Creative awards will be won by teams that consist of members of the public who have co-created with them." - I don't neccessarily think this will be the case. In a way I agree. I also come from a social science background, the other part of my degree is in psychology. I also have had the good fortune to work for companies that are in the technology industry. Therefore, I believe that the public will be very important co-creators in ways such as social anthropology, focus groups, survey feedback, etc. - many aspects of quantitative and qualitative research. I also think information space will become more and more inundated with consumer advertising (every comment about a brand is has the potential to be relavent, useful content) through the ever-increasing array of social media networks (YouTube, Twitter, etc.). Therefore, part of the job as facitators is learning how to promote positive, trustworthy full pictures of brands and their corresponding companies to a widespread consumer audience.
  • Bill - no idea how you found me but I am very honored that you got in touch! Beyond Code is an excellent book and I have great admiration for Rajesh.

    I will send you an email very soon!
  • Bill Sherman
    Rajesh Setty is a very good friend of mine. I've collaborated with him as a concept editor on a number of projects, including Beyond Code as well as his next book.

    While I can perform mechanical editing, my true strength in writing lies as a concept editor. It's the high-level project strategy and structure.

    Feel free to ping me, and we can chat.
  • ACE - Mr Cavill it would be a pleasure to have you on board.

    Your input would be fantastic.

    I will be sending out an email to all those who have said they are interested in due course!
  • Hello Jmac,
    This sounds fascinating and I would love to contribute a few bits and pieces if I could.

    Simon
  • YES!

    Tomi - its an absolute honor that you are on board with this......having read almost every single one of your publications I can safely say that your thoughts have inspired me to move this forward....

    More soon :)
  • Hi Jmac..

    Great idea. First to help with context, my five books have run between 280 pages and 380 pages in length, and been between 80,000 and 110,000 words in total size, so that also helps perhaps put it in context.

    But yes, this sounds like a great initiative, and I'd be very happy to join in, so count me in

    Tomi T Ahonen :-)
    www.tomiahonen.com
  • hahahah - its not the editorial risk its the fact you are running the bleeding edge of hutchinson whampoa that scares me!

    honored to have you on board old chum - lets share a glass of red soon :)
  • Carl Taylor
    Duh, love to, not love too - what kind of a proof reader am I gonna be?
  • Carl Taylor
    yes I'd love too,

    Carl
blog comments powered by Disqus