The wisdom of Devin Wenig

(Or, if you repeat a word often enough, it sounds just as stupid the fourth time)

I just think we’ve hit an inflection point where technology is now so pervasive and so useful that we’re past the tipping point. And the world of e-commerce and commerce are now just seamlessly merged, and everything is omnichannel.

Today we don’t even know what e-commerce means. They’ve just come together, the on- and the offline. Now, every merchant, every retailer must have an omnichannel strategy or they won’t survive.

Nobody has an electricity department in their company; nobody has an Internet department anymore—although they did a few years ago. I suspect that within 24 months, no one will have a mobile strategy. They’ll just have an omnichannel, connected-screens strategy.

I think that in this omnichannel world—imagine, for planning purposes, that everything is for sale in every marketplace, every means, and every channel. We may never get to that world, but it’s a useful planning assumption.

The Wortham / Kardashian chronicles

July 23: Jenna Wortham outs herself, in BuzzFeed, as a massive fan of Kim Kardashian: Hollywood:

I bought 3 of the $4.99 K packs! It’s mostly for the outfits and hairstyles. The good hairstyles all cost so many points! I bought a cute shaggy bob and then I had to get the beige bathing suit thing with the sheer robe to go with it for the Triste launch party at Chateu Nuit. I would say it embarrasses me to admit that, but I’ve stopped trying to rationalize it.

July 30: Jenna Wortham files “Kim Kardashian, an Unlikely Mobile Video Game Hit" for the NYT:

The game is free to download and play, but it sells in-app purchases for things like additional energy and “K-stars,” which can be used to buy special hairstyles, accessories and clothing. Although players don’t have to spend money to advance in the game play, they are clearly enticed to indulge on the fancier items available for sale — imitating Ms. Kardashian’s own high-spending ways.

August 9: Jenna Wortham files “Living Like the Kardashians, via Smartphone" for the NYT:

The game — which may be downloaded free — encourages players to spend their real-world money on “k-stars,” a game currency that enables them to buy extravagant clothing and hairstyles for their avatars in this virtual world.

n0nbelle asked:

My last name is Salmon also. I've never met another Salmon before. "Salmon" as in a person with that last name, not the pink fish that swim upstream to mate and whatnot. ANYway, hi. Probably out of line or something, Idk, but nice to meet you, fellow Salmon (again not the fish). Question: how is your's pronounced?

Like the fish. Silent l.

hydeordie
hydeordie:

Got this little gem from my all time favorites Artsy this morning in reference to this little post about the LACMA Calder show. I double checked the links and everything is working. One link is to LACMA and one link is to the Calder show page on LACMA’s site, which is live. Just so we’re all clear, this is what Jack from Artsy wants me to do:
Wants me to change my link from LACMA’s Alexander Calder show page (the show is up until the end of July, so if you haven’t, go!) to the completely unrelated Artsy Alexander Calder page.
Wants me to change my link from a non-profit museum website to Artsy’s for profit website.
Wants me to change a link in a 4 month old post under the guise of work? Can I get that job, I’ll harass bloggers about posts up to 5 years old if I could get paid for it! #Shameless
Oh Jack, you had the time and inclination to find this post and even more time to send me this hyperlink-happy email, but you didn’t have the time to look into how I feel about your company. Thank you though Jack for reaffirming my negative views on your company’s practices because y’all really make trying to succeed in the art/internet business look like the infamous Zoolander/Inside the Computer scene and that shit is priceless to me.
I emailed him back asking these exact questions, think I’ll hear back?

hydeordie:

Got this little gem from my all time favorites Artsy this morning in reference to this little post about the LACMA Calder show. I double checked the links and everything is working. One link is to LACMA and one link is to the Calder show page on LACMA’s site, which is live. Just so we’re all clear, this is what Jack from Artsy wants me to do:

  1. Wants me to change my link from LACMA’s Alexander Calder show page (the show is up until the end of July, so if you haven’t, go!) to the completely unrelated Artsy Alexander Calder page.
  2. Wants me to change my link from a non-profit museum website to Artsy’s for profit website.
  3. Wants me to change a link in a 4 month old post under the guise of work? Can I get that job, I’ll harass bloggers about posts up to 5 years old if I could get paid for it! #Shameless

Oh Jack, you had the time and inclination to find this post and even more time to send me this hyperlink-happy email, but you didn’t have the time to look into how I feel about your company. Thank you though Jack for reaffirming my negative views on your company’s practices because y’all really make trying to succeed in the art/internet business look like the infamous Zoolander/Inside the Computer scene and that shit is priceless to me.

I emailed him back asking these exact questions, think I’ll hear back?

flapjackstate

quixotess:

You CAN get your quotes on Tumblr to go bold or italicized. If your line breaks are disappearing, you can format that too.

Just write the formatting into the quote. So <b>Bold text.</b> <i>Italics.</i> The formatting for getting line breaks is just <br />, no closing tag. So put
<br />

I just did this, it works! Even though the quote does not look like an HTML field, you can put HTML in there. Weird, yet wonderful

Using what he calls the “careless and piecemeal” data of wealth reports, Mr. Piketty calculates that today the richest 1 percent owns about half the planet’s wealth…

According to Mr. Piketty’s calculations, the immutable dynamic of returns on capital being greater than the rate of economic growth will concentrate half the planet’s wealth in the hands of the richest 0.1 percent within 30 years, impoverishing not only the middle, but also the upper-middle classes.

The above quotes appear in the New York Times, in an article by Scott Reyburn.

I would like to ask Mr Reyburn, and the NYT: where, exactly, in his book, or elsewhere, does Piketty make these statements?

I have not read all of Piketty’s book, and it’s hard to prove a negative. But I don’t think Piketty ever attempts to quantify global wealth inequality: it’s hard enough just to get reliable figures on a national basis. And I’m all but certain that he never extrapolates anything to the point at which the richest 0.1% end up with 50% of the wealth. Neither would he consider such an extrapolation to constitute an “immutable dynamic”: after all, his entire final chapter is an explanation of why such dynamics are not immutable.

Reyburn’s claims, then, would seem to be narrowly false: Piketty does not say what Reyburn says he says. They’re also broadly false: nowhere does Piketty paint some dystopian vision where the upper-middle classes have become “impoverished”. 

On top of that, Reyburn also violates the NYT’s policy of adjusting all prices for inflation. He talks about a Leonardo bought in 1914 for $1.5 million: what’s that in today’s money? Reyburn never says; he waves only in the direction of an analysis which said that the purchase was a record price, in real terms, in 1961. Has the record been broken in the last 53 years? Maybe if Reyburn did the math, we could work that out!

All in all, this is shoddy stuff from the NYT. Or, is it from the NYT? Officially, the NYT has merged with the IHT, and they’re now a unified news organization. In practice however, stories like this still feel as though they’re IHT pieces, which wouldn’t see the light of day had they gone through editing in NYC. Is a double standard still in place?

I was given my first story to check. I vaguely remember that it was something about new mutual fund products, and it was written by a freelancer. It sounded good — that is, until I started checking it. In essence, the entire thing was wrong. Up until that point, words on the page, in their unambiguous black and white, had always conveyed such authority that I didn’t question them. I never read that way again. An editor once said to me that good writers were really dangerous because you could be so seduced by their writing that you simply drank in their unsupported leaps of logic.