DD&U in the news

So your favorite blogger was interviewed by Meg Tirrell, a reporter from Bloomberg, the other day (not in my blogger capacity, unfortunately. Someday, though). Here's the story. It's an interesting little piece about Kodak's strategy for remaining relevant in a post-film world, and it captured my imagination for three reasons:

1) I'm in it! Thousands of people are going to read this story and think "Wow, this guy has some insightful things to say about business and marketing. He make say 'like' a little too much, but that's only an indicator of his authenticity and credibility." I hope to somehow leverage this article into a permanent role as spokesman for Young People Everywhere.

2) Kidding, of course. It was something of a revelatory experience, though, to be interviewed and then see my words in print. As the guy that's usually doing the interview, I usually think nothing of distilling long conversations with subjects into a few quotes and paraphrases that fit the narrative that I'm crafting. That's just the way it goes. Thinking back on the conversation I had with Ms. Tirrell, it's interesting to see which quotes she picked, which she left behind, and what she decided to take generally out of the interview. Which is not to say she picked bad quotes or took me out context. They're good quotes, completely in line with the rest of the interview. I found it fascinating to have a more inside view of the choices that another writer made. What fun!

3) In terms of the article's content, I think it lines up with a lot of what I've been writing recently about newspapers, which is a philosophy that can be applied to pretty much any business in a time of transition. As you've heard me say (or seen me write) before, newspapers are in the news business, not the paper business, but that's a realization that many newspapers may have come to too late. Here's an illuminating quote from Tim Calkins, a marketing professor at Northwestern:

“What Kodak stood for was really memories,” he said. “That is still an incredibly important thing even though the technology has changed.”

A company like Kodak had choice (and maybe it still does) of being in the memory business, or the photograph business, just like way back when railroads had the choice to be in the transportation business or the steel-rail-and-wooden-tie business, or any of a number of other examples. One choice gives you the agility to change with the times and the tastes of the consumer. The other ties you to what eventually will become a dead, or at most a niche, technology. This is why I'm amazed to read things like this. Exxon will spend $29 billion this year on "finding, drilling and refining fossil fuels and chemicals," but then complain that research into alternative energy sources is too dependent on government underwriting. Exxon, one of the richest companies in the world, has decided that it's in the oil business, not the energy business. Remember that.