At the beginning of this 2015, two of the creators of the Manifesto of the Train of Keys (Cluetrain Manifesto), surprised us with a document titled “New Clues”. The document in question was written by Doc Searls and David Weinberger, two of the four authors of the original manifesto. Possibly the most active authors in public appearances in the years following the publication of the 1999 manifesto.

They are also probably the two most radical authors when it comes to philosophical thinking about what the Internet means. In fact, there is another post-Cluetrain document signed by both in 2003 entitled “What is the Internet and how to stop confusing it with something else”, where they launch the definition of what they call the “Repetitive error syndrome”, where they explain how Many of the things that companies and people do with the Internet are misinterpretations of what the Internet really is: an agreement between people to do things together, simple and without owners.

In that same document they say that “Perhaps the companies who think they can force us to listen to their messages – their banners, their nosy graphics that overlap with the pages we are trying to read – will  Nepal phone number list  realize that our ability to move around on-site is intrinsic to the architecture of the Web. ” A phrase that curiously seems like a very anticipated prologue to 2015’s “New Clues”.

As expected, the first analyzes of these “new keys” did not wait. Some of the reviews, most of them, speak of “a new manifesto”, “an update” or “an evolution” of the original manifesto. The authors of the Cluetrain Manifesto met in 2009 to review the document and came to the conclusion that there was nothing to update, therefore, the document must be analyzed based on that premise and that only 50% of the original authors Cluetrain participated in these “new clues”. No, it is not an update, enhancement, or supplement to Cluetrain. “New Clues” is a separate document from Cluetrain, with a similar but different spirit in its focus and purpose. While Cluetrain is expressly aimed at the world of Marketing and business, “New clues” appears to be something of a hawk to companies, governments and users alike.

In fact, “New Clues” only dedicates a small part of its content to talk about Marketing and it does not do so on good terms but as a scolding of how badly it has been doing, reiterating the phrase “Markets are conversations” from the original Manifesto . However, unlike Cluetrain, “New clues” in the end is not made up of 100% keys in truth, but most of its statements are pointing out the bad things of Internet use and abuse. The authors do not hide it, rather they say it openly when they point out that they bring “A pocket full of sermons.”

The “New clues” nod to digital radicalism. But when we go to the field of execution, that small space that is dedicated to Marketing does not allow it to be a guide to do things better, but rather a reproach of the explorations that have been made to find marketer meaning in talking with audiences on the internet.

Phrases such as “If we want to hear the truth about your products, we will get it from other sources” could be interpreted as advice, if not accompanied by others such as “? We will tell you when we are in the market looking for something. Our way. Not the yours”. Now, the fact that their phrases are rude does not take away from the truth, however, it seems to me that we must also give credit to the brands that have been trying to create mechanisms that help them take advantage of the electronic medium by shaking off the cobweb of traditional Marketing strategies, but being careful enough that the older generations understand that this is good for them.

The document is valuable, without a doubt. Despite being repetitive in expanding on explaining things that were already clear in the 1999 Cluetrain, despite its “sermonizing” tone, it is certainly a necessary wake-up call. A stop so that we understand that in many cases we are not eating it as much as we think, and that we actually continue to do some stupid things, usually because we seek the selfish end of the matter: to get rich easily.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.