Honouring Sacrifice

With all the hype about the Beijing Olympics still very much in the air, it would be easy to understand why the following words would conjure up the thought of athletes: patriotism, sacrifice and glowing light (of the iconic Olympic torch, right?)

But tonight, courtesy of a lengthy and descriptive recollection by my husband, the images of Canadian flags waving in the breeze and spectators standing three-deep are tied to something much deeper and infused with much more meaning than who can run or swim the fastest.

What Happened

Driving back from his parents’ home down the 401 highway, my husband began to notice that every overpass from Whitby to Scarborough was lined with people holding Canadian flags as well as fire trucks and police vehicles with their red lights blazing.

Additionally, dozens and dozens of cars were lined up on the shoulders of the highway, drivers leaning against them as if waiting for something- and clearly something important.

Upon arriving home, my husband learned that these people were waiting for the passing of a motorcade.

According to the CBC website, the motorcade was bearing the bodies of three soldiers who fell in the line of duty in Afghanistan.

What It Means

Hundreds of citizens had turned up merely to pay their respects to these young men who died needlessly half a world away in a senseless conflict. And it is a conflict in which Canada should not have become involved in the first place.

The citizens who lined this route may or may not support Canada’s role in the conflict in Afghanistan. But they came out to support the soldiers through this tremendously moving and remarkable display. The sacrifice and selflessness of those men has been recognized and appreciated and their memories honoured

May these young men and the many others—too many others— whose bodies have followed this route rest in peace.

iPhone? Not I.

With all the fanfare attached to it, you’d think the arrival of the iPhone in Canada was the Second Coming.

True, it’s been a long wait. Our neighbours to the south have had access to that sleek, touch-screen goodness for almost a year.

And frankly, like most Apple products, it is a beautiful, stylish piece of technology. Just look at it.

As with most of the items masterminded by brilliant British-born industrial designer Jonathan Ive, so deservedly feted by the Design Museum in London for his body of work, the result is innovative, clean and instantly covetable.

But like many others living in Canada, I will resist the siren song of this particular piece of technology.

Why Resist?

It’s not because of Apple. Indeed the powers-that-be at Apple are very canny about promoting the brand and making their products must-haves.

As noted by the still-in-beta-site BrandDoozie, Apple’s brand is powerful and has an amazingly loyal following:

“From their iconic logo to iPod’s campaign of gyrating silhouettes against a kaleidoscope of color, Apple is more than a brand—it’s a culture.”

And the fact they’ve managed to do that generally by buzz rather than by expensive marketing campaigns.

[Tangent: For an alternative take on Apple's brand that is quite intriguing, take a look at what Robert Scoble had to say last winter in a post entitled The Brand Promise of Apple.]

So, Why Resist Again?

Two words: Rogers Communications.

Rarely has a company with exclusive rights to a product managed to generate so much negative buzz for a hot commodity so quickly.

Because it is the only phone provider in Canada that uses the GSM network required by the device, Rogers is the only provider that can carry Apple’s 3G iPhone.

And unlike in the United States where unlimited data plans are offered, Rogers decided to lock iPhone purchasers into a three-year contract. And according to CTV.ca, the initial pricing was…less than ideal.

“The cheapest plan under that structure includes 400 megabytes of data, 150 minutes of weekday talk time and unlimited evenings and weekends for $60 per month plus fees and taxes.”

The Result?

A Major backlash. A website called ruinediphone.com sprang up and led to massive online petitioning, the organization of a protest rally and a campaign to get many Rogers customers to drop the corporation as a provider.

The protest has had an impact. As noted by the blog Load This with Steve Tilley, earlier this week Rogers decided to offer iPhone buyers the chance to choose their own standard voice plan and then add on a data plan allowing for 6 GB of mobile data a month for an addition $30.

But this has been a bit like throwing a bucket of water on a three-alarm fire. Gillian Shaw, of The Vancouver Sun, noted that this appeasement has not been entirely effective:

“The numbers of disgruntled consumers voicing their ire at www.ruinediphone.com continued to climb in the wake of Rogers’ announcement, aimed at cooling the controversy before today’s launch of the new phone.”

Who Was Smart About This?

Bell Canada. They looked at the negative publicity that Rogers was receiving and did something clever.

As of August 8th, they’re going to offer Samsung’s version of the iPhone, the Instinct (currently available in the US via Sprint), and they’re going to offer it with reasonable rates. Look at the comparison that the Globe and Mail offered on the two phones:

“The Samsung Instinct, which has many of the same features as the Apple iPhone, differs from the iPhone in one major way: Its monthly price plan, which will dramatically undercut the iPhone plan announced last week by Rogers Wireless.

A subscriber can…pay less than $40 a month for a modest voice plan accompanied by an unlimited Internet on Bell’s high-speed data network.”

Conclusion

So despite my love of Apple’s blend of solid technology and superior design, it looks like in this case, I’m going to have to wait and follow my Instinct instead of biting into Apple’s latest.

Part of it is the better pricing- that’s for sure. But a company clever enough to be responsive to another company’s disgruntled customers and to generate good PR by being more reasonable about rates?

They just seem smarter than the other guys. And a tad more reasonable.

What about you? Would you go along with Rogers’s terms to get the new iPhone? or would you be satisfied by a Samsung? What would/will you do?

Two Nations, Two Sports Messes and One BIG Need for Better Crisis Management

And now for something completely different….Sports and public relations.

Canada: HNIC’s theme departs and with it someone’s ability to manage crisis effectively

Up here in the not-so-frozen north, the whole mess is not so much with the NHL or hockey itself but with its mother network having first lost the rights to the Hockey Night in Canada theme and then whomever they asked to handle the ensuing PR having botched things so badly that even American comedians have picked up on the situation and have started making fun of it. (And, oddly enough, hockey isn’t quite so popular in the States, so if they’ve picked up on it there….oops.)

Colbert on HNIC

Stephen Colbert offered hilarious commentary on the whole HNIC situation last week. (Viacom, which appears to have a much less well-developed sense of humour, pulled it off YouTube. So this is a bit cumbersome, because this is copyrighted material and because of the aforementioned lack of a sense of humour, this has to be done in a round about way. You have to go to the Comedy Network’s site by following this link to the episode and fast forward to about 3 minutes and 30 seconds in to find the bit. But it is worth it.)

It’s a bit that simultaneously manages to make fun of both cultures, which is particularly rib tickling for someone who has spent half her life on each side of the Am-Can divide.

And what the fact that Colbert commented on HNIC means in terms of PR

But the fact that this bit exists is a very bad sign for whomever has been trying to handle the PR for this situation. They not only dropped the ball, but it has rolled downhill and gathered snow and now has turned into an avalanche. How did that happen? Were they not warned? What was their strategy for handling this supposed to be?

America: Does NBA stand for Now BSing America?

Talk about a mess. On the other side of the border, the issue isn’t just about music. It’s about corruption and it has the potential to be as big a scandal as the 1919 Black Sox fixing of the World Series if the allegations imparted are proved to be true.

[Please note: my take on this is rudimentary- for a really good examination of the Donaghy/NBA situation, you should go read Ironic Teachings's blog- he has a fabulous handle on this and is always a good read.]

The initial scandal

Tim Donaghy, a second generation basketball referee who officiated games for the NBA for about 13 years, resigned from the league when word came down that the FBI was investigating whether he bet on games that he had been officiating and whether his calls had affected those games’ point-spreads.

But he had a lot more to say.

As noted in the New York Post, Donaghy, who has also admitted to being a compulsive gambler, has claimed that executives in the NBA, seeking to increase playoffs-related revenue, sought to manipulate the games through the referees:

“Top NBA executives rigged playoff series to pack arenas and pump up TV ratings by ordering officials to shamelessly make calls that benefited favored teams, disgraced ex-ref Tim Donaghy charged in bombshell court papers today.”

The NBA’s response

The NBA has handled this by taking a position that can only be called “the best defense is a good offense.” But at least they are actually actively trying to counteract the allegations- not well mind you – but at least they are trying, as explained by ESPN’s website:

” ‘We welcome scrutiny here. This is something that should be scrutinized,’ said Stern, who called Donaghy a ’singing, cooperating witness’ and repeatedly referred to the former referee as a felon as he spoke with reporters for more than eight minutes near the loading dock of the Staples Center as he arrived for Game 3 of the Finals.”

Did it work?

Has this been an effective way to handle things? Apparently not if you read a sampling of the American sports press. The best summation may have been offered by Rick Telander of the Chicago Sun-Times when he stated

“If Stern can’t see what a mess he potentially has on his hands and how no one from inside the NBA should be part of any league influence-peddling investigation, then he has become blind to the real world. As the USA Today editorial summed up: ”The NBA has much more at stake than winning an argument with a felon, which, after all, should not be hard to do.”

No, it has its credibility at stake.”

How could the NBA have handled this better? Is a poor PR strategy better than no seeming PR strategy at all?

And how have the great and glorious pastimes of two nations come to this?