It’s easy to miss a quiet revolution in a world dominated by the noisy chaos of Twitter threads, AI clickbait, and influencers slinging collagen gummies. But that’s exactly what Substack has pulled off, amidst the rise of AI content pushing audiences even more desperately in search of authenticity. What started as a niche newsletter platform has evolved into the intellectual’s social network — a place where writers, journalists, and thinkers reclaim the direct, authentic connection that social media, mainstream media, and algorithms all seem hellbent on destroying.
Substack didn’t emerge with the loud, self-congratulatory fanfare of a Silicon Valley IPO or the viral buzz of a flashy social app. It didn’t promise to “disrupt” anything or “revolutionize” human connection with AI. No, Substack’s ascent has been quieter, more purposeful — like the thoughtful hum of a coffee shop where real conversations are happening amidst the chaos of a noisy world. And that’s precisely why it has struck a chord with a growing community of thinkers.
But why do I characterize them as empirical? Aside from my other favorite place for intellectual discourse, Quora, we find ourselves on an internet inundated with opinion, perspective, and emotion, even academic discussion has been overwhelmed good intention, outright bias, or misled understanding, leaving us challenged to find meaningful content from pragmatic and altruistic authors. Above that fray, Substack has, in my experience, positioned itself as a home for people who want more than rationality for the sake of argument. It’s for those who crave ideas rooted in observation, evidence, and authenticity. These thinkers aren’t content with the thin veneer of clickbait or algorithmically engineered fluff; they’re seeking depth, substance, and meaningful connections. Substack has tapped into this need, becoming the platform for those tired of the shallow discourse found on social media and in much of mainstream media.
To appreciate how, I want to explore its roots, the evolution of online content, and why readers are abandoning the endless scroll for something real.
The Founding of Substack: A Rebellion Against the Content Economy
Substack was founded in 2017 by Chris Best, Hamish McKenzie, and Jairaj Sethi with one simple but subversive idea: What if writers could publish directly to readers and get paid for it? Crazy, right? Best, the former CTO of Kik, had seen the power of unfiltered communication. McKenzie, a tech journalist who grew disillusioned with how ad-driven media warped what got published. Together with Sethi’s technical genius, they created a platform that feels like a throwback to a time when writing wasn’t dictated by clicks or trends.
Substack’s pitch was deceptively simple: Writers own their lists and content, charge subscriptions, and interact directly with their readers. No ads, no algorithms, no middlemen. This was more than a business model; it was a rebellion… back to, perhaps, the way the internet should be.
The platform quickly attracted writers who had grown frustrated with traditional media’s increasing reliance on clicks and social media’s hollow echo chambers. It wasn’t just journalists, though. Thought leaders, analysts, and creatives of all kinds found Substack to be a haven—a place where they could focus on producing quality work for an audience willing to pay for it.
Substack didn’t just cater to content creators; it also met the needs of readers who were increasingly disillusioned with mainstream platforms. The rise of AI content further fueled this frustration, as readers found themselves wading through a swamp of auto-generated articles and clickbait masquerading as journalism. Substack’s human-driven, subscription-based model offered something rare: content that felt real.
A Brief History of Content Online: From Blogs to the Newsletter Renaissance
Substack didn’t emerge in a vacuum. It’s the culmination of decades of internet content evolution. Start with blogging — personal, raw, and revolutionary. Platforms like Blogger and WordPress democratized publishing, giving everyone a soapbox while giving rise to Web 2.0 and social media. But blogging required an audience, and as social media exploded from there, in the mid-2000s, blogs started looking like the neglected MySpace profiles of internet content.
In the attention economy, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and their ilk capitalized on our desire to connect, only to warp it. Algorithms rewarded sensationalism, reducing complex ideas to catchy headlines and shallow debates. At the same time, content mills emerged, churning out SEO-driven fluff designed to rank on Google rather than provide value. Then came Medium, promising to bridge the gap with sleek, shareable posts. But as it grew, Medium lost something, just as, unfortunately, has my long favorite, Quora, as the quest for monetization invariably pulls advertising into the fold, which pushes for pages views, which favors virality and popularity, which draws the click bait.
Meanwhile, newsletters, once dismissed as relics of the early internet, quietly began making a comeback. MailChimp and TinyLetter paved the way, but Substack seized the moment by combining newsletters with blogging and a subscription model that incentivized quality over quantity. It didn’t just bring newsletters back; it made them indispensable. Before I explain, let’s clarify the rise of “Fake News” and the end of traditional media, briefly…
Social Media’s Impact on Journalism: Headlines Over Substance
By the time Substack hit its stride, social media had already gutted traditional journalism. Platforms like Twitter reduced complex stories to bite-sized outrage. I am referring to it as “Twitter” by the way on purpose, that is what it was; henceforth we’ll go with X. Algorithms rewarded sensationalism, leaving substance to wither in the margins. News outlets, scrambling for clicks, began chasing headlines that played well on social media rather than investing in the depth readers craved. All, driven by Publishers with little grasp of the internet, even less understanding of AdTech (advertising technology), and a misplaced belief that the Brand in news still meant something to readers (or should). Hell, even today you’re seeing the death throes of mainstream media (often referred to as MSM) as it yells into the void that self-designated authorities are more credible than everyone sharing what’s happening.
Add AI to the mix (which in this case, is ultimately just going to report the news to us, in the way we each prefer), and the problem metastasized. Tools like ChatGPT and Jasper made it easier than ever to flood the internet with auto-generated content. Suddenly, readers were drowning in SEO-optimized spam and shallow, regurgitated takes. The internet had become a content farm, and readers were left starving for authenticity.
The Emergence of Authenticity: Why Readers Want Real Connections
This is where, I think, Substack found its foothold; it’s certainly why I turned my attention to it for my community. As readers became increasingly disenchanted with the superficiality of social media and the cynicism of influencer marketing, they began craving something real. Substack’s genius lies in its ability to deliver exactly that. Writers like Bari Weiss (The Free Press) and Matt Taibbi (Racket News) have built thriving newsletters that bypass traditional media gatekeepers. Even Tucker Carlson, no stranger to controversy, is evidence of this shift, having found success connecting directly with his audience after his departure from Fox News.
Substack isn’t just the domain of journalists though; it’s a thriving hub for scientists, venture capitalists, and even politicians who are tired of the filtered, PR-driven discourse dominating mainstream platforms. Biologist and author Heather Heying, for example, uses her Substack to explore complex scientific ideas with rigor and nuance, reaching audiences who crave discussions grounded in evidence rather than the sensationalism of traditional media. Venture capitalists Lenny Rachitsky and Steve Blank have each built a massive following by sharing detailed insights into product management, growth strategies, and startup trends, creating spaces where business leaders can access empirical, actionable advice. Even political pundits such as Heather Cox Richardson or Timothy Snyder in history, Jennifer Rubin with The Contrarian, or Andy Borowitz‘s comedy, have taken to Substack, using the platform to bypass soundbites and engage directly with readers on policy and governance. These creators exemplify the shift toward unfiltered, thoughtful discourse, where the emphasis isn’t on fitting into a narrative but on fostering honest, data-driven conversations. They’re living proof that authenticity and empiricism resonate far beyond the world of journalism.
The common thread? These creators don’t rely on clicks or algorithms. Their success hinges on their ability to engage directly and authentically with their readers. Substack has effectively killed the publisher and elevated the platform, allowing individuals to self-publish and build loyal audiences without compromise.
A Social Layer Without the Noise
Substack’s latest move, Notes, takes the platform even further. Launched in 2023, Notes is an X-like feature that encourages short-form posting and conversations among writers and readers. But unlike X Notes doesn’t prioritize viral engagement; it’s built to foster meaningful exchanges. By adding this social layer, Substack has positioned itself as the intellectual alternative to social media—a space where ideas, not outrage, reign.
Starting with Substack Notes is straightforward, and it’s a game-changer even if you’re not a writer with a newsletter to promote. Notes is designed for conversations, not just broadcasting, so you don’t need a polished essay or a grand idea to get started. Begin by following writers, thinkers, and creators whose work you enjoy—they’ll populate your feed with thoughtful updates and discussions. Jump in by sharing shorter, more informal posts: a question to spark debate, an interesting link, or even a quick insight you’ve been mulling over. Engage with others by liking, replying to, or resharing their Notes, fostering connections in a way that feels natural and conversational. Notes isn’t about building an audience; it’s about participating in an ecosystem of ideas, connecting with others who value thoughtful discussions. Think of it as a University Library for the digital age — one where you can exchange ideas without the noise and ego that dominate other platforms.
Regardless of Where, Start Building Your Audience Now
The rise of Substack marks a pivotal moment in how we consume and create content. It’s a wake-up call for anyone still tethered to the old ways of publishing, where gatekeepers, algorithms, and ad dollars dictate what gets read. Substack has proven that readers are willing to pay for thoughtful, authentic content and that writers can thrive by bypassing the noise and speaking directly to their audience.
The world doesn’t need more noise. It needs more thinkers. It needs you.
The story of the Alamo is one etched into the American consciousness, a tale of courage and defiance against overwhelming odds that has inspired generations. In 1836, Texian and Tejano defenders faced off against the Mexican army in a siege that would ultimately result in their tragic defeat. But the Alamo’s legacy transcended that single battle. It became a symbol of independence, resistance, and the will to forge a new identity—a sentiment that would fuel the Republic of Texas and eventually shape the ethos of the state and arguably, the United States entirely.
Of note, as the Trump administration manifests over the coming weeks, among many changes is talk of the end of the Department of Education, and while we can debate the merit of changes being made, what we should be is pragmatic about the fact that with changes, we must adjust and rise to opportunity. Texas is among a few states renowned for tackling the question of education head-on, with the November ballot addressing School Choice. “School choice is a term frequently used to describe school vouchers, programs that use taxpayer money to help pay for students’ private schooling.
During last year’s session, supporters pushed for a voucher-like program called education savings accounts, which would give public funds directly to families who opt out of the state’s public education system so they can pay for private school tuition and other education-related expenses,” shared Texas Tribune’s James Barragan, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick names private school vouchers as his top legislative priority.
I hope what you’re reading between the lines is that Texas is already behind American independence while being ahead of where the country is likely moving.
A Decentralized Federal Government
Recently, President-elect Donald Trump has hinted at a desire to redistribute the federal government’s power base across the country. Speculation abounds over his potential plan to move key federal agencies out of Washington, D.C., aiming to distribute the influence of agencies more evenly across the U.S. Possible relocations include the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to Colorado and other agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency’s regional offices, the Air Traffic Organization, and the American Indian Environmental Office. This shift isn’t just about administrative logistics; it signals an effort to decentralize decision-making, bringing the government closer to regions impacted by specific policies and reflecting a more locally-driven approach to governance.
Did You Know?
Texas has historically wielded considerable influence over national textbook content due to its large student population and centralized textbook adoption process. Publishers often tailored their materials to meet Texas’s requirements, affecting the textbooks available across the country.
However, recent developments have led to a shift in this dynamic. Advancements in digital publishing and the increasing ability to customize educational materials have diminished Texas’s outsized impact on national textbook content. Publishers, largely thanks to Texas and the innovation seen from there, can now produce state-specific editions more efficiently, allowing for greater flexibility in addressing diverse educational standards across different states.
e-beth, via Twitter/X, sparked the notion among voters, “President Trump is interested in decentralizing the federal government and moving agencies across the country…”
President Trump is interested in decentralizing the federal government and moving agencies across the country. I have created a thread of where I think the agencies would be best served. Add your suggestions too.
It’s no secret that Texas, long a bastion of independence-minded politics, would welcome such an approach. Yet, Texas seems oddly absent from conversations about potential relocation sites. Colorado has been suggested as a base for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and Alabama won Space Command rather than where seems obvious — the nation’s second-largest state and 8th largest economy when compared to nations in the world, with vast geographic diversity…
— and with Elon Musk’s moves, and Vivek Ramaswami’s financial company relocating to Dallas, I’m not going to ask, “Where’s Texas?” because I find that most don’t realize the implications of what’s in Texas. Tied together, Texas, on top of the already strong libertarian values, alignment with independence, and extensive infrastructure for housing major federal departments already in the state. Decentralize Here.
Today, Texas remains a frontier for those who believe in self-determination, often questioning federal oversight and championing a decentralized approach to governance. This spirit has attracted leaders and companies who want to build their own future rather than fit into existing molds. It’s no surprise, then, that this same value system is being invoked in new debates over government decentralization—a move that, if realized, could profoundly alter the role and influence of the federal government.
Texans have long viewed the Alamo as a reminder that freedom demands vigilance, sacrifice, and the willingness to confront established powers.
A New Economic and Technological Heartland: Texas
As the country increasingly shifts its focus toward sectors critical to national resilience—energy, national defense, commerce, media, education, and futuristic technologies like space exploration and quantum computing—Texas is uniquely positioned to lead.
Dallas: The FinTech Capital of the World
Dallas has emerged not only as a significant player in financial technology but as a globally competitive fintech capital, reshaping the future of commerce and finance. In North Texas, financial technology companies are crafting solutions that transcend traditional banking paradigms, focusing on innovations that promote financial accessibility, decentralization, and efficiency. This isn’t simply about embracing a digital wave—it’s a targeted transformation that positions Dallas at the forefront of a new financial frontier.
As explored in depth recently here, Dallas is advancing beyond mere trend adoption; it’s becoming a leading source of fintech innovation that rivals the established powerhouses of New York and Silicon Valley. The financial ecosystem in North Texas is both diverse and dynamic, housing key players across sectors like payment processing, digital lending, blockchain, and cybersecurity. From companies offering decentralized finance (DeFi) solutions to pioneers in artificial intelligence-driven financial analysis, the breadth of expertise here showcases a commitment to pushing financial technology into uncharted territory.
Dallas’s fintech ecosystem is characterized by a unique collaboration between major corporations, emerging startups, and regional economic development initiatives that support scalable innovation. With financial giants like JPMorgan Chase establishing a robust presence alongside agile fintech firms, North Texas has created an environment where groundbreaking products can scale rapidly, bridging the gap between Silicon Valley innovation and Wall Street’s financial reach.
Yet, the region’s influence isn’t confined to economic impact alone. Dallas’s fintech sector is increasingly positioned as a pillar of national security, providing financial infrastructure that safeguards economic stability. As the U.S. grapples with emerging threats, from cyber attacks to global financial volatility, Dallas’s fintech industry has proven resilient and forward-thinking. Local companies are developing decentralized financial tools and cybersecurity solutions that not only enhance individual financial independence but also fortify the nation’s financial systems against disruptions.
This unique ecosystem has enabled North Texas to chart its own course, infusing the fintech sector with Texan values of independence, pragmatism, and a commitment to empowering individuals. Here, Dallas is establishing itself as the heart of an emerging, decentralized global financial network that champions financial autonomy, challenges the traditional concentration of financial power, and continues to attract top-tier talent and investment. As such, Dallas is not merely adopting fintech trends; it is redefining them, setting a global benchmark for what the future of finance could—and should—look like in a world increasingly driven by digital transformation.
MOVE TO MAKE? With the new Stock Exchange, cryptocurrency, and the boom of Venture Capital and entrepreneurship in Texas, move The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), an independent agency created by the Congress to maintain stability and public confidence in the nation’s financial system, to Dallas
San Antonio: America’s Cybersecurity Stronghold
San Antonio stands as the nation’s primary cybersecurity stronghold, a critical hub where military strategy and digital security converge to defend the United States against increasingly sophisticated cyber threats. Known as “Cyber City, USA,” San Antonio’s deep-seated ties to national defense are unrivaled, with an extensive military presence that includes some of the country’s most influential cybersecurity and intelligence facilities. Anchoring this ecosystem is the National Security Agency’s Texas Cryptologic Center, a core component of national cybersecurity operations. As one of only a few NSA outposts across the U.S., the Texas Cryptologic Center brings an elite level of intelligence operations and cryptographic expertise, making San Antonio’s contributions to national defense both highly specialized and essential to securing critical U.S. assets.
San Antonio’s cybersecurity landscape, however, extends well beyond the NSA. The city hosts an impressive array of private cybersecurity firms that have established close partnerships with both federal agencies and private-sector defense contractors. From endpoint security and threat intelligence to advanced network protection, San Antonio’s firms cover a full spectrum of cybersecurity services, creating a robust ecosystem that can respond rapidly to emerging threats. The local industry is supported by a highly trained workforce, many of whom are former military personnel with specialized experience in intelligence and cyber warfare, giving San Antonio a workforce uniquely capable of tackling the most complex challenges in the digital defense domain.
Meanwhile, the Department of Defense has also recognized Austin’s strategic potential, initiating projects in downtown Austin aimed at fostering military innovation, technology development, and collaboration with the private sector. While these initiatives have sparked interest and innovation in defense tech startups, Austin’s burgeoning tech scene cannot replicate the depth of San Antonio’s established defense infrastructure. When it comes to the serious business of national security, including cyber intelligence, military-grade cryptography, and secure communications, San Antonio remains the heart of Texas’s defense operations.
This strategic alignment between government, private industry, and military agencies allows San Antonio to rapidly adapt and respond to the evolving nature of cyber warfare. As threats from state-sponsored actors and international hackers become more sophisticated, San Antonio’s cybersecurity sector is evolving to meet new demands. The city has attracted leading quantum computing research focused on developing quantum-resistant encryption algorithms—a necessity as quantum computing advances threaten traditional encryption methods. By preparing for a quantum-driven future, San Antonio is ensuring that it remains at the cutting edge of cybersecurity, positioning itself to address tomorrow’s threats today.
San Antonio’s role as a cybersecurity leader also supports the country’s broader defense initiatives. With its proximity to Joint Base San Antonio, the city serves as a vital center for the development and deployment of secure technology used across multiple branches of the military. Cybersecurity firms in San Antonio work closely with the Department of Defense and intelligence agencies to innovate defense solutions that can withstand the most advanced cyber attacks, making the city an indispensable asset to national security.
As the only city outside the East Coast with such a concentrated nexus of defense-related cybersecurity talent and institutions, San Antonio occupies a unique and increasingly critical role in protecting the digital landscape of America. It is a city built on security, where the lines between military and civilian expertise blur, creating a collaborative environment that is unmatched in scale and focus. With quantum computing on the horizon, San Antonio’s forward-thinking approach and well-established defense-oriented ecosystem ensure that Texas will continue to be a central player in safeguarding America’s future against cyber threats that could redefine warfare itself.
MOVE TO MAKE? The Department of Defense is synonymous with The Pentagon but with cybersecurity, cryptology, and border security, what should be in San Antonio? The Department of Homeland Security
Austin: The Media Epicenter
Austin, long celebrated as a beacon of creativity and independence, is rapidly evolving into the nation’s most influential hub for media innovation and disruption. Dubbed the “Creator Capital of the world,” Austin isn’t merely a place where creative ideas flourish; it’s where the fusion of technology, culture, and media is redefining how stories are told, consumed, and reshaped for a global audience. With Austin now home to some of the most influential voices and platforms in media, the city is transforming into a vital pulse point for American discourse and a crucial driver of innovation.
The arrival of Twitter under Elon Musk’s leadership in Austin marks a watershed moment for media and free expression in the U.S. Musk’s decision to relocate Twitter to Texas is more than a strategic business move; it’s an ideological choice that resonates deeply with Austin’s commitment to freedom and unbridled innovation. In bringing Twitter to Texas, Musk is cementing Austin’s role in the national conversation around free speech. As a vocal proponent of unregulated dialogue, he has made it clear that Twitter’s platform under his stewardship will prioritize open discourse—a mission that complements the libertarian ethos that runs through Texas culture. The move also reinforces Austin’s appeal to companies and founders eager to operate in a space that prioritizes free expression and challenges conventional boundaries. Musk’s efforts to preserve free speech on Twitter amplify Austin’s position as a powerhouse in media and cultural influence.
But Musk is not the only prominent voice driving Austin’s rise as a center for American media. Joe Rogan, whose podcast draws millions of listeners and features some of the most consequential conversations in the country, relocated his operations to Austin, further solidifying the city’s status as a national stage for thought leadership and innovation. Rogan’s presencein Austin, including his Comedy Mothership, signals more than a trend; it represents a movement of influential voices choosing Texas as the platform from which to shape American dialogue. His success speaks to the unique convergence of tech, media, and a fiercely independent mindset that Austin provides—a fertile ground for challenging ideas and controversial discussions that are harder to sustain in more regulated and ideologically uniform environments like those of the coasts.
Austin’s allure as a tech and media hub has also captured international attention, with global audiences looking to Texas as a microcosm of U.S. innovation. The city’s vibrant landscape of startups and creatives has made it the go-to destination for entrepreneurs, artists, and technologists aiming to redefine their industries. Media companies and digital creators are drawn to Austin for its blend of regulatory freedom, supportive business environment, and cultural inclusivity, which allows for a broader spectrum of voices and narratives than typically seen in established media centers. The combination of low regulatory burden, cost advantages, and an atmosphere that champions bold ideas has allowed Austin to emerge as an ideal incubator for media companies that are rethinking how content is produced and distributed in the digital age.
Austin’s cultural vibrancy fuels its appeal as a home for media disruptors. Known for its music festivals, eclectic art scene, and a collaborative spirit, the city embodies the intersection of technology and art in a way that few places do. This unique cultural ecosystem attracts media innovators eager to explore new formats, leverage emerging technologies, and create content that speaks to diverse audiences. By cultivating an environment where unconventional ideas and risk-taking are encouraged, Austin has transformed into a hub where the next generation of media innovators can experiment freely.
The significance of Austin’s media transformation extends far beyond Texas. As an epicenter of cultural influence, Austin is playing a growing role in shaping narratives that reach every corner of the U.S. and beyond. Its rise as a media powerhouse is reinforcing a shift in the balance of influence from traditional coastal strongholds to the heartland. With platforms like Twitter and voices like Rogan’s now based in Austin, a major voice in American media is emerging from the center of Texas—a voice that champions diversity of thought, independence, and the freedom to question. This shift is emblematic of a larger cultural and political migration toward the values that Texas embodies: a blend of pragmatism, freedom, and resilience that resonates with millions across the country.
In short, Austin is not just a city of creatives and tech innovators; it is becoming the heart of America’s media evolution. The convergence of iconic voices, pioneering platforms, and a distinctly Texan ethos of independence is shaping Austin into a vital part of the national media landscape. As Austin continues to attract entrepreneurs, creators, and thought leaders who value freedom and innovation, the city is on track to be one of the most consequential forces in defining America’s cultural and media future. Through its blend of freedom, tech innovation, and cultural influence, Austin is demonstrating that the future of American media may very well be shaped not on the coasts, but right here in the Texas heartland.
MOVE TO MAKE: With the film industry already moving into and around the Live Music Capital of the World, a hub of startup innovation, with Twitter/X calling central Texas home, The Federal Communications Commission (The FCC) should be in Austin
This Comprises the 35 Corridor of Texas: A Quantum Future and Hyperloop Connection?
Texas’s I-35 corridor, stretching from San Antonio through Austin to Dallas, could become the spine of America’s technological future—a “Quantum Corridor.” Quantum computing, a technology poised to revolutionize sectors from healthcare to finance, is finding fertile ground in Texas. Institutions across the state are ramping up quantum research initiatives, and the potential applications span far beyond what we currently imagine.
Furthermore, The Boring Company’s proposed hyperloop tunnels, potentially connecting Texas’s major urban centers, could reshape transportation within the state. This high-speed transit system would create a new form of regional interconnectedness, allowing talent, ideas, and commerce to flow freely between San Antonio, Austin, and Dallas. Texas’s strategic positioning in these interconnected cities would redefine the concept of regional influence, creating a contiguous zone of innovation that rivals the established East and West Coasts.
The Political Context: Texas’s Divergent Values
One of the most fascinating aspects of Texas’s transformation is the political environment. Austin remains a rare Democratic stronghold in a state that otherwise leans heavily toward libertarian and conservative values. This ideological diversity highlights Texas as a state that welcomes individualistic thinking, fostering an ecosystem where independent thought thrives alongside commercial and technological innovation. The influx of residents from traditionally liberal states speaks to Texas’s appeal as a place where freedom of thought and expression, combined with economic opportunity, create an attractive alternative to coastal cities.
The result of Washington investing here, is a true crossing of the aisle, supporting the creative and liberal culture of Austin, as well as substantial interests of the Democrats here, while making the pragmatic decision of integrating the strengths and experience of Texas’ existing sectors, with our federal government.
A Curious Omission: Space Command Goes to Alabama
Overlooked, we must consider the curious decision to relocate Space Command from Colorado to Alabama. Despite Texas’s strong aerospace presence in Houston and its suitability as a space industry hub, this opportunity curiously bypassed the Lone Star State. While Alabama has its merits, the decision seems puzzling when Texas has invested heavily in the future of space exploration. Perhaps this reflects a reluctance to acknowledge Texas’s emergence as a technological powerhouse, yet Texas’s role in America’s space future is undeniable, even if federal decisions sometimes overlook its assets.
Houston: Energy and the Frontier of Space
While the cities along the I-35 corridor are pushing forward on finance, media, and cybersecurity, Houston remains America’s energy capital and a major player in space exploration. It’s home to NASA’s Johnson Space Center, as well as numerous oil and gas companies that underpin the nation’s energy sector. As the country transitions to renewable energy, Houston has the infrastructure and expertise to lead that transformation.
Houston, the “Energy Capital of the World,” is not only a leader in traditional oil and gas sectors but is also spearheading the nation’s transition toward renewable energy and space exploration. This transformation is uniquely underpinned by policy and regulatory frameworks in Texas that align with the state’s values of economic autonomy, minimal government interference, and pragmatic innovation. Houston’s blend of established energy infrastructure and a robust business ecosystem places it in a prime position to guide the country—and, by extension, the world—through the complexities of energy transition and space exploration.
With policy and oversight designed to incentivize innovation rather than restrict it, Texas has created an environment where energy companies can experiment and expand into renewables on a large scale. The solution to the challenges of climate change, are in Texas; despite many perceiving that perhaps Texas’ focus on oil is one of those challenges. Texas’s regulatory approach enables the state to remain agile, responsive, and unencumbered by heavy-handed mandates that often hinder similar efforts in other parts of the country. This approach has already paid dividends: Texas led the nation in solar growth between 2022 and 2023, with a 37% increase in solar capacity and a 25% rise in solar power generation, according to Climate Central’s “A Decade of Growth in Solar and Wind Power.”
Houston’s rise as a leader in renewables isn’t just beneficial to Texas; it sets an example for the nation and the world, demonstrating that large-scale energy innovation can thrive when policies encourage efficiency, experimentation, and market-driven solutions. Texas’s regulatory philosophy champions the alignment of economic incentives with environmental goals, allowing companies to pursue clean energy advancements while maintaining their profitability. This balance serves as a global model for achieving sustainability without sacrificing economic growth—an increasingly relevant example as nations worldwide seek pathways to transition their energy economies in ways that support jobs and growth.
Houston’s role in space exploration further illustrates Texas’s far-reaching impact. Home to NASA’s Johnson Space Center, the city is deeply embedded in America’s legacy of space exploration. Yet, with the growing involvement of private space companies, Houston’s influence is expanding. This city is now at the heart of a commercial space era where private and public sectors collaborate on everything from space tourism to lunar exploration and deep-space missions. Texas’s favorable regulatory environment, tax incentives, and willingness to support private ventures are attracting space companies to the state, fostering partnerships that could make Houston one of the world’s most important launchpads into the economic opportunities of the final frontier.
In a world where resource management, energy independence, and sustainable exploration are becoming crucial, Houston’s policies and incentives allow for innovation that doesn’t just benefit Texas but sets a standard for responsible yet ambitious growth. By aligning regulation with the state’s values of free enterprise, Houston is not only leading America’s energy and space sectors into the future but is helping shape a global economic landscape that respects both profitability and sustainability.
The New American Heartland
Texas’s Alamo legacy is one of resilience, independence, and vision—traits that resonate deeply as the state becomes the country’s new heartland for technological, economic, and national security leadership. With major hubs in finance, cybersecurity, media, as well as in energy and space, Texas has the critical infrastructure and cultural ethos needed to drive America’s future. As we approach a new chapter, Texas’s values, resources, and commitment to independence position it to lead on issues fundamental to the nation. Texas isn’t just a part of America’s history; it’s an essential part of America’s future. Decentralize here.
Possessing a compelling story outweighs merely having a brilliant idea so much so that media has become the new capital for burgeoning founders.
The fundamental concept here is that media — encompassing storytelling, audience engagement, and community building, well beyond what you might consider it to mean in “the press” — serves as a powerful currency. For startups, especially in their early stages, the ability to attract and engage an audience can be more crucial than securing financial capital. Why? Because a passionate, engaged community can provide invaluable support, validation, and momentum that money alone cannot buy.
The Power of Storytelling and Community
At its core, a startup thrives on its ability to connect with people. A great story does more than just convey what your business does; it humanizes your brand, making it relatable and memorable. This narrative forms the backbone of your startup’s identity and helps differentiate you in a crowded market.
Consider the example of Airbnb. Early in its journey, Airbnb faced significant financial struggles. What helped them persevere was their compelling story and the community they built around the concept of belonging anywhere. Founders Brian Chesky and Joe Gebbia famously sold custom-designed cereal boxes to raise initial funds, a move that not only provided much-needed cash but also captured media attention and public imagination. This quirky, relatable story became a pivotal part of their brand identity, fostering a strong, supportive community.
Another powerful example is Red Bull, which, beyond giving you wings, we explore with founders in detail in our incubators. The company famously evolved from an energy drink company into a media powerhouse with a strategy revolving around creating content that resonated with its target audience—extreme sports enthusiasts and adrenaline junkies. They invested in producing high-quality videos, sponsoring extreme sports events, and even launching their own media house, Red Bull Media House. This venture produced a wide range of content, from documentaries to live event coverage, that not only promoted their product but also built a lifestyle brand around it. This approach has made Red Bull synonymous with extreme sports and adventure, far beyond just an energy drink.
Why Media is More Critical Than Capital for Startups
Audience Engagement and Validation: When you build a strong media presence, you attract a community that believes in your vision. This audience acts as early adopters and brand advocates, providing critical feedback and validation that can guide your development and refine your product.
Organic Growth and Virality: A captivating story and an engaged community can drive organic growth far more effectively than traditional advertising. Users who are emotionally invested in your brand are more likely to share your story, leading to viral growth—a phenomenon that paid marketing campaigns often struggle to achieve.
Credibility and Trust: Media coverage and a robust online presence can significantly boost your startup’s credibility. Being featured in reputable publications or gaining traction on social media platforms builds trust with potential customers and investors alike. For instance, Tesla’s rise can be attributed not just to its innovative products, but to Elon Musk’s masterful use of media to craft a compelling vision of the future.
Resource Efficiency: Leveraging media is often more cost-effective than extensive advertising campaigns. Crafting a compelling narrative and building a community requires creativity and strategic thinking more than substantial financial resources. Startups like Dollar Shave Club used viral videos to disrupt traditional markets without the need for massive advertising budgets, showcasing how media can level the playing field for smaller players.
Building a Thriving Community Around Your Brand
Building a community starts with understanding your audience and what resonates with them. It involves continuous engagement, authenticity, and delivering value beyond your core product. Social media platforms, blogs, and interactive content like webinars and podcasts are excellent tools for fostering this connection.
Glossier, a beauty startup, built its brand on community engagement and customer feedback. By actively involving their audience in product development and using social media to create a dialogue, Glossier cultivated a loyal following that propelled them to success without traditional advertising.
Crafting a Powerful Pitch
Your pitch must be more than a presentation of facts and figures or a fill-out of the pitch template some accelerator or article told you to fill out; it should be a story that resonates on an emotional level. It needs to convey not just what you do, but why you do it and why it matters. Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle model emphasizes starting with the “why” to create a deeper connection with your audience.
To measure the success of your pitch and overall media strategy, focus on engagement metrics: shares, comments, and community growth are more telling than simple view counts. And let me pause here because if you’re a startup founder, you likely thought I was referring to your Startup Pitch (a pitch deck), and I am… because your storytelling as a startup should be a varied and compelling as that which you create online to promote yourself. Tools like Google Analytics and social media insights can help track these metrics and refine the content you create, helping turn media into far more than likes.
For startups, media truly is the new capital. Embrace the power of story and community, as these elements can transform your vision into a thriving business. Building a strong narrative and engaging your audience are not merely supplementary tactics—they are fundamental to your startup’s success. By leveraging media effectively, you can achieve organic growth, build credibility, and foster a supportive community that money alone cannot buy.
For further reading, consider exploring resources such as “Building a StoryBrand” by Donald Miller or “This is Marketing” by Seth Godin, which delve deeper into the art of storytelling and community building in the digital age. These works provide practical insights and strategies that can help amplify your startup’s media presence effectively; this is *capital* that you can raise right now, making fundraising far easier when it comes to engaging and interesting investors in what you’re doing.
In October 2021 former president Donald Trump announced plans to launch Truth Social, a new social media platform very popularly discussed and debated by traditional media and politically oriented people. “Galvanizing a conservative media universe,” he described this forthcoming network in his pitch deck as such, begging curiosity of if and why media plays a distinct and important role in partisan contexts. The former President’s response to getting banned from major social media networks coupled with his claims of fake news is to create a social media platform that embodies the values and policies of his work and community. Interestingly and quickly overlooked, Truth Social comes on the heels of the launched and quickly shutter Donald Trump blog, as well as hype for Parler, Gab, and other “conservative” social media efforts.
Presidential communication has advanced since the time of newspaper, radio, and televised press conferences to now social media. In Donald Trump’s case, social media played a major role in his rise, as it did too for Barack Obama, given his campaign’s sophisticated use of social media.
U.S. Presidents and Media Technology
In media, we struggle with the never-ending challenge of Media Literacy and the balancing of human rights in communication and influence. That is for example, what rights do people have to decide how they use their property in communicating information? Can people use that property to communicate fictions or “fake news”? Fake news is not only a sensationalized notion in politics, it’s a very real and valid form of media evident in The National Enquirer, The Onion, Babylon Bee, or Saturday Night Live and The Daily Show’s commentary on News. Where is the line drawn wherein a person and their company certainly has the right to say whatever they want when it also opens up society to the implications of lies, misunderstanding, fictions, and bias.
What is Media Literacy?
Media literacy consists of practices that allow people to access, critically evaluate, and create or manipulate media. Media literacy is not restricted to one medium. Media literacy education is intended to promote awareness of media influence and create an active stance towards both consuming and creating media.
Media companies such as Twitter, are private entities where YOU are the publisher; enabling unfettered content with which we might only expect that they have a right to delete or ban whomever violates their terms and conditions. On the other hand, a Media company such as News Corp or Hearst, also private companies, determines what is published; shifting the responsibilities and rights to consider. And indeed, President Trump was removed from many platforms where “social media” companies rightly decided they didn’t want to host his voice any longer; while traditional News media certainly still publishes news about Donald Trump, that news being at their discretion and with their voice.
After losing public access to his followers on social media platforms, and having an extraordinarily strained relationship with the press, it’s not unreasonable for entrepreneurs to appreciate that Donald Trump is attempting what Donald Trump can and frankly, arguably even should, do; creating his very own platform.
I shared this thought with Quora when asked, Why is Trump competing with Facebook and other social media tech companies, and who supplies the money?
“The free market means such sites can compete. That they should compete. And that the government is considering this stuff and getting involved, the best counter move he can make is to stand up a company of his own, a private company too, and start fighting with that government about private property rights, free speech, etc.”
It’s not exactly groundbreaking news within American history for a president to go to heads with the media. I dug a little deeper into history to understand the complicated relationship between presidents and the media. Here’s what I found. Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Harry S. Truman, Richard Nixon, George W. Bush, and Bill Clinton have all had a strenuous relationship with journalists, the press, and the media.
“It is very important in terms of the final campaign that the media be effectively discredited.” President Richard Nixon
One of America’s Presidents distrustful of the media, Nixon, lost his presidency because of the Watergate scandal in which Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein revealed his role in a wiretapping conspiracy. Already at a crossroads with “the media” prior to Watergate, his hasty exit unfolded immediately as a result and he left a legacy felt today, “Forty years after Watergate, presidential suspicion of reporters and attempts to keep the press at arm’s length remain high,” Jon Marshall with The Atlantic.
Throughout those subsequent years of distrust, it’s easy (too easy) to think that the President who curried your favor did everything right while the other did everything wrong, and while many perceive Donald Trump as being the first massive adopter of social media, it was really his predecessor who recognized the shift in public attention from traditional media to social media.
“Many factors contributed to his success, but a major one was the way Obama and his Chicago-based campaign team used social media and technology as an integral part of their campaign strategy, not only to raise money, but also more importantly, to develop a groundswell of empowered volunteers who felt that they could make a difference.”
And too, well before Obama & Trump, well before even Watergate and Nixon’s legacy with the Media, political candidates and people seeking that seat in the Oval Office, have recognized the critical importance of the Media (very often wielding it in unfortunate ways). The bad behavior didn’t start with Facebook nor recent President’s use of the medium, but easily as far back as the late 1800s, when it wasn’t some social media biasing or influencing us while failing to “police” the voice of those we don’t like; it was that trusted News Media working hand in hand in Politics.
Yellow journalism was a style of newspaper reporting that emphasized sensationalism over facts (sound familiar?). During its heyday, in the late 19th century, competition over the New York City newspaper market fueled an overblown tone similar to what we experienced with Donald Trump’s use of Twitter. In this case though, major newspaper publishers Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst stoked the flames (keep in mind, well before “social media” could be considered the blame). Yellow journalism, in name derived from a popular cartoon strip about life in New York’s poverty-stricken neighborhoods, called Hogan’s Alley, drawn by Richard F. Outcault. Published in color by Pulitzer’s New York World, the comic’s most well-known character came to be known as the Yellow Kid, and his popularity accounted in no small part for a tremendous increase in sales for Pulitzer. In 1896, in Heart’s reaction boost sales of the New York Journal, Hearst hired Outcault away from Pulitzer, launching a fierce bidding war for his talent. Hearst ultimately won. Pulitzer refused to give in and hired a new cartoonist to continue drawing the cartoon for his paper. This battle over the Yellow Kid and a greater market share gave rise to the term yellow journalism.
Influential figures such as one Theodore Roosevelt led a drive for U.S. overseas expansion that had been gaining strength since the 1880s. Hearst was often quoted at the time saying — “You furnish the pictures, I’ll provide the war!” so while the two competitors fueled anti-Spanish public opinion which, warranted or not, helping justify the Spanish-American War, yellow journalism (early “fake news”) stoked not just sales but war, and a President into the Oval Office.
Claiming Truth Through Mass Communication / Media
Claiming truth, through any medium, is a thorny and tangled topic. One must first wonder: who’s truth? Trump’s truth certainly varied from the mainstream media’s truth. Nixon’s truth was different from the journalists who uncovered his secretive communications. For decades longer, centuries even I’m sure, the News Media has spun a narrative intertwined with the objectives of those in office. Who is right and wrong is a different discussion in itself. From a media technology perspective, media and technology have their own dark side: transparency, manipulation, and censorship come into play with truth-seeking and truth-hiding when/as the media is open to everyone and anyone to use; by the same token though, were we really better off when very few were deciding what we read and heard?
Perhaps our disappointment in one another, frustration with Presidential elections, and stress over 1 role in the entire world, isn’t a reflection of us, but of the office having too much power and influence.
U.S. elections and the attention world leaders such as the President (any President), have in the last few decades, really drawn attention to the power and influence wielded by the world’s highest offices.
From our point of view of what’s going on with the *industry* of social media, it’s hard not to take pause at how on one hand, ordinary people are crying foul at the voice politics takes through online media, while on the other hand, those very governments are the only organizations empowered to keep themselves out of it. And rather than keeping political influence and media separate, governments are crying foul at the media for being the problem, and responsible for the problem, rather than pointing the finger at themselves for using it for the very reasons they’re saying they want to prevent.
There is a bit of a misunderstanding about the role and responsibility of news media in society. The 1st Amendment in the United States implies that while government can make no law abridging (meaning, limiting) the freedom of the press, that amendment doesn’t prohibit the government from leveraging and influencing it.
As a result of that, and a history of the news media stressing that it’s fair, balanced, and factual, for the same of establishing trust in the brand, people tend to perceive and expect that the news media is responsible for only facts and that it’s protected from the government.
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Hang on… such a question contains a false assumption. We do not and never had an independent press.
A free press, maybe. Arguable and ideally, yes. But the media is not independent of the government.
Most people, throughout the world, are of a misplaced point of view, likely driven by governments, to convince people that they can trust the media.
The ongoing debate throughout politics, news media, fake news, and social media, really requires you go two or three layers deeper than what’s discussed on the surface.
Here are a few facts; unequivocal facts that are absolutely and with great certainty true – though you may believe or perceive otherwise and could certainly show me articles, papers, research, and politicians who claim otherwise:
The media is not and never ever ever ever has been based on facts.
All media is and always has been biased by money and influence (power)
There is really no such thing as “Fake News” – there is incomplete news, biased / editorial news, and fiction. Fake News is a fabricated idea to help persuade opinions. If it’s false, it’s false. If it’s true, it’s either incomplete or opinionated. It is never, ever, complete and factual.
The United States’ 1st Amendment obligates that the Federal Government stay out of the Press and Speech, completely. It has never actually done so.
News is not independent. It never has been and likely never will be.
There is ZERO privacy in media. You do not have privacy, aren’t due privacy, and it technically isn’t really possible. If you are consuming media, you are data being monetized. Always have been… that’s not an internet thing.
Data about you isn’t “your data.” Data about you is data others have, it’s their data, about you. The internet doesn’t change this fact that has always been true… magazines collected and monetized information about you too, they always have.
With all that in mind….
Is true Democracy unattainable?
In fact, yes.
It doesn’t exist anywhere in the world.
What we have are democratic processes. We have Republics with elected representatives who are influenced democratically.
What is true is that anything approximating a Democracy is impossible without Free (and protected) speech because a Government empowered to control what people think, will.
Free speech (protecting a freedom of the press) enables the people to retain control over the Government. We enable the Government, it serves us; not the other way around.
Government doesn’t give us rights, we protect our rights from it.
Government doesn’t create opportunities, jobs, nor wealth or equality, we empower it to tax, regulate, and create laws that force social change.
And without a freedom of press/speech, we lose that power.
Without that, we are not democratic, we’re merely doing what that government says we should.
Notice, I limited my point so far to the question of Free Media.
We do not and never had an independent press.
And we don’t need an independent press in order to have democratic situations.
The government has always and will always influence the press.
“They say it takes ‘two to tango,’ and in this case it’s a combination of politics & media,” John Zozzaro. “Journalistic integrity has been outpaced by click bait false narratives, and technology that preys on your deepest fears and concerns. This has been a very slow boil over the last three decades. What we are witnessing play out in modern day politics, is the perpetuated polarization driven by platform algorithms built on ‘more = more’
It’s no fault but our own uneducated and uninformed selves… The unfortunate reality is we have put too much trust in what the news stations tell us and have displayed such an incredible appetite for sharing disinformation, that our enemies abroad no longer need weapons to watch us crumble, all they need is a brilliant data scientist and a solid marketing budget.”
The government regulates businesses, advertising, and what can be on the media, politically. That, in turn, means that the media is interdependent with the government.
Media isn’t biased. Rather, We The People (the public) frustrated over it being biased is only part of the story and the least of our challenges. News media is divided.
We’re distracted to perceive that the challenges in the News Industry are the News Industry’s fault (unable to evolve to how the internet works, unwilling to change the business model) but when you look at a data set that Ad Fontes Media studies, it’s immediately apparent that the influence, the divisiveness, is political.
To avoid too much control over it, we must be diligent in always questioning the motivations and goals of a government engaging on those FACTS above. Empowering the government to rule/regulate/prosecute ANYTHING related to those facts, means we’re enabling the government to have more control and forcing the media to be more dependent on it.
That’s not a good thing. No matter which side of that aisle you find yourself on, left or right, Democrat or Republican, hopefully you can agree that our neighbors, learning to appreciate that the media IS biased, while also reigning in how politics is the cause of the divide of media, we’re all better off.
Media will remain free, as long as we keep fighting efforts by governments to limit what’s allowed. But it will never be independent, and we must always push back on government to make sure it doesn’t become more dependent.
A free, but dependent press is a press that CAN say whatever it wants, but that doesn’t mean it will nor wants to.
Now, before I fire you up about either side of the political aisle, the looming U.S. Presidential election, or the very important issues of race plaguing the United States, related to that headline, I want to steer your focus to the other side of the coin exposed in a headline like that.
Tonight, the first of Presidential Debate of the 2020 election will be streamed to millions of households throughout the world, and it was an Axios Headline thanks to the incredible media industry journalist, Sara Fischer, that caught my attention most, “Media prepares to fact check debates in real time.”
The Media today has to very clearly and publicly share how they’re fact checking… as though we’ve lost confidence that they are.
How did “Fake News” become an issue in society?
Certainly a critical issue of the times, media bias, integrity, and accuracy assuredly has more history to it than Trump Tweets, the salicious argument of the extremes of MSNBC vs. Fox News, or The Daily Show wit.
Media bias is real. One could (and frankly, should) argue that it’s not “Fake” but rather a very understandable, acceptable, and expected experience with News. Take a look at this and just try to convince me that News Media doesn’t favor sides; but then also try to appreciate that maybe it should – maybe it must – maybe the problem isn’t that it does but that *WE* aren’t introduced and taught how to deal with the FACT of it.
WTH Actually Happened to the News?
The internet happened.
Perhaps our greatest challenge in society today is that we’re not (we can’t easily be) taught, as children in school, how technology has forced media to change. But *that* is a critically important lesson because HOW the News Media works explains WHY it does what it does.
Fake News isn’t a cause of our problems, it’s a symptom of how things work.
The internet forced changes, decades ago; the business model died and revenue with it. We’re experiencing the consequences.
“The press has dropped, in my view – and I’m talking about the national mainstream media,” noted Attorney General Bill Barr in Katie Pavlich‘s Townhall interview, “Has dropped any pretense of professional objectivity and are political actors, highly partisan who try to shape what they’re reporting to achieve a political purpose and support a political narrative that has nothing to do with the truth. They’re very mendacious about it,”
Intriguingly, replace the context of Barr’s comment pertaining to politics with capitalism, social issues, local regulations, education, alcohol policy… literally ANYTHING, and you can (hopefully) pretty readily see how and why Media speaks to a distinct audience — and the mistake we make (and challenge we must overcome) is that we get influenced by what’s popular = what’s true.
Everyone became a reporter
Everyone became a reporter and in the process, devalued the News publisher and journalist (why pay for that when I get the tweet from my neighbor for free??)
To survive, News has increasingly tried to remain relevant in our era of Social Media engagement, influencers, and TikTokers, that is, they’ve had to “buzzfeed” their headlines with more sex appeal, blood, and scandal. And the proof to *them* that it worked? More traffic to their sites, retaining whatever anemic revenue they have left.
And while they perceive it’s working, because they’re getting more traffic and scraping by, they’re actually falling even further from being relevant… people increasingly realize they can get *that* drivel anywhere AND that we can’t trust it.
What might cause News to recover (and actually for once be meaningful), is that many Reporters and Journalists, who themselves as individuals have integrity, are learning how to self publish and make money themselves.
Driving the news: Nicole Carroll, editor-in-chief of USA Today, tells Axios that the USA Today Network, which includes over 200 local news sites as well as USAToday.com, will be live-checking the debate in real-time across all of its live video feeds and social channels.– Sara Fischer, author of Media Trends with Axios
How can we possible reach a point where we have trust in news without actually getting to know personally (accountably) our sources of news?
Easiest place to see the trend in TV is The Daily Show, which originally was a fairly neutral News Comedy show. It became increasingly left wing and spun out a show initially rather “opposite” of that just for the sake of the split audiences.
What is social media?
Think about that.
Before the internet, Media was one way communication, available largely only to those who could afford to produce it.
What this meant, regardless of underlying intentions, was only what publishers/producers or government wanted communicated was communicated.
Sure, anyone could print a “paper,” broadcast on amateur radio, or get on the public access TV station, but beyond that, voices were silenced not by intention but circumstance.
We have, in the U.S., the 1st Amendment to ensure everyone CAN use those forms of media but make no mistake that those forms of media were expensive and regulated such that while freely available, they weren’t terribly meaningful to 99% of the worlds’ voices.
Ponder that.
We have freedom of speech and the press BUT, who appointed capable enough companies, wealthy individuals, and government to communicate what should be said??
And before you argue, “we did” (because we elect those officials or that “anyone can do it” because it’s available), please appreciate that what I need you to grasp that is opportunity is NOT the same as accessibility or ability.
We all could, but overwhelmingly most couldn’t.
Along comes the internet.
And like it or not, everything changes. Suddenly, people are empowered. In time, increasingly, we have, access, affordably, and we’ll have voices.
As a result of that, a form of media accelerates.
Think of this too… social media is NOT new.
You could call the radio show. You could write a letter to the editor. You could do a YouTube video on the Cable Access Channel.
Social Media is just the word coined because the internet made that connection between content and audience more meaningful.
And because of the internet, we all have it.
That is incredible. That is revolutionary. That is precisely what humanity needs to emerge better.
With that comes a downside but make no mistake that that downside was ALWAYS there. BOTH the benefits and the risks aren’t new, they’re amplified.
What is the downside of media? (appreciating this reality?) Lies, agendas, bias.
Those downsides aren’t new.
You’re implying or thinking that that moron on TikTok who won’t wear a mask during coronavirus, means TikTok is the problem???
You’re implying that that elected ignoramus on the radio who sparked a riot, isn’t the SAME circumstance; that the radio is the problem??? Or that the “Yellow Journalism” of publishers biasing news isn’t also the same thing??
The problem isn’t the media… the CHALLENGE that falls UPON US is teaching that this is HOW it works and enabling the world to better appreciate the role of News Media and HOW to consume FACTS. In the process, teaching and enabling the journalists of exceptional integrity, to thrive (to make money) in this changing economy.
Social Media has given everyone a voice. We’re seeing inside N. Korea, the protests in Hong Kong, we see the abuses of people throughout the world, we know better which government officials are thieves and liars, we can add our voices to the chorus of what’s wrong with humanity.
Facebook, Twitter, and SnapChat aren’t the voices. They aren’t the publishers. They’re just platforms. They’re platforms of us.
And if we don’t like what’s there, we have no one to blame but ourselves for being that there.
Sure, we can point at one or the other and say “bad them, for not censoring that stuff we don’t like!” But … come on, that’s censorship. We already know there’s all kinds of things wrong with anyone else preventing what anyone can say, even if what they say is wrong.
We are the voices. For good and bad.
And it’s far better world with this media on which we all have a voice, than the world in which most of us don’t.
People will increasingly “subscribe” to not news outlets but the reporters themselves; people who will strive to make sure their own reputation is solid, through honesty and accuracy.
Need proof that *that* can work?
Start with (and where to follow them directly), Judy Woodruff, Bob Woodward in the WaPo, Any of the NBC or ABC anchors. Brian Williams and Lawrence O’Donnell, or the Sunday New York Times, tend to provide a broad spectrum. Look to people like Sara Fischer, directly, for exploring the news, or to journalists like Cherie Hu, in our industry, who are covering an industry because they personally care. PBS News, The AP, NPR, Reuters, The BBC, The Hill, Bloomberg, The Economist… There are places to get more balanced and fact-based news. The responsibility is on us to know how and where to identify fake from real; and to support the journalists with integrity.
Granted, we’ll still have a bunch of crap peddlers trying to make a buck getting those subscribers for themselves, but at least we’ll be able to start seeing and identifying great journalists of integrity, pay to support them, and get some truth back in reporting.
Why the future is now – and the secrets that could be the key to getting your next big idea funded. Whether it’s VC, sponsorship or grant, I had a chance, with Epsilon’sJohn Immesoete, to break down the startup ecosystem as it relates to media and technology. We discuss ever-changing role of today’s CMO, and why data should be at the top of every marketer’s mind.
Filmed in Austin at SXSW 2017
Transcript:
John: Joining me today is startup consultant Paul O’Brien. He’s the founder of MediaTech Ventures, which works with brands, startups and agencies to scale ideas and businesses. Welcome to another episode of Conversations with Giants. We’re here in Austin, Texas this week with South by Southwest. We have a great guest today, Paul O’Brien, a part-time CMO, startup consultant, founder of MediaTech Ventures and our first robot man that we’ve ever interviewed on this show. So I’m very excited. This is actually… I’m a little scared. It’s like when the terminator comes to ask your name.
Paul: Thank you. Thank you, I’m excited to be here. I like doing this because it lets me augment reality.
John: Yes.
Paul: I get a better sense for what’s in the room and what we’re up to today. Seeing the things that we can change.
John: Wow. Because regularly reality kind of sucks.
Paul: Well, yes. It would seem so, wouldn’t it?
John: Right.
Paul: But the challenge of course is you can’t see anything about these things on. So you sit here, effectively in the dark unless you’re watching something and that’s why I got this very slick set that…
John: Wow.
Paul: Good morning!
John: Good.
Paul: Let me see where we’re at?
John: Now it’s real, all right.
Paul: This is the future, isn’t it? That we change the way we interact with reality.
John: I think partially.
What is MediaTech Ventures?
John: Well that’s actually kind of what’s cool. I mean, you are a bit of a futurist. Let’s start exactly with what MediaTech Ventures is? Explain a little bit, what’s going on.
Paul: Yes, I’d love to. It’s a—there’s a challenge on our economy with understanding the pace of which technology changes. A challenge in that it changes so fast that you need futurists, which thank you, I don’t think of myself as a futurist, I just think of myself as trying to keep up. And I do that because I spent a lot of time in Silicon Valley and I started my career actually in media but by way of the technology; working with Yahoo and these early streaming businesses out of broadcast.com and Yahoo Launch, when the old early music platforms.
And so, I’ve always been enamored with the fact that technology in media, whether it’s entertainment media or industrial media, ways to see things, ways to hear things that they’re intrinsically intertwined with technology; that technology makes it work, enables us to produce, enables us to do this, enables us to reach audiences and as a challenge though for the artists, for the talent, for the creative, for designers, to stay on top of those things.
And so, MediaTech Ventures works with universities, works with cities and states, works with venture capitalists to help folks understand where the money is moving and why? Help folks keep up with things like virtual reality and where the opportunity exists. And really just endeavors to keep this moving towards that future, keep us entertained, keep us enjoying music and not being so frustrated with how it gets disrupted. And instead, understanding what new technologies enables us to do to enjoy it, to monetize it.
John: So this is really cool because a lot of times we talk in the show, we’re advertising, marketing. And we talk about a model that is 50 years old, it’s changing rapidly or attempting to change rapidly. Maybe having a hard time sometimes keeping up with the way the world is changing. And basically, you’re a guy who to people who are out there who is like, I don’t know if there’s anything in that for me or whatever, but I have an idea that I think it could be good. They can come to you and you can help them formulate the idea, polish the idea, and find money to make it a reality?
Paul: Really, the last part is what we strive for…
John: Okay.
Paul: And not necessarily just money but resources. Right. Who are the folks? Who are the skilled professionals? Who are the editors, if you’re developing a film? Who are software developers who can do with augmented reality or video games?
John: Right.
Paul: Who are the talented folks that understand this technology? Where does the money move? Because of that, whether it’s frankly, whether it’s ventured capital or sponsorship or grant. A lot of different entities want to participate in this ecosystem. It’s challenging to understand how.
John: Right.
Paul: And so we work to help them figure that out and make a difference.
John: So you head on something that’s really pretty interesting to everybody. Creative people, in particular, sometimes aren’t the best business people.
Paul: Sure.
John: So don’t necessarily have that sense.
Paul: Sure.
John: But everything that you’ve talked about so far is like where the money is, where the money moves? Everything’s a business. An idea is maybe only as good as an idea that you can sell.
Paul: Sure.
John: Talk to me a little bit about, you talk about the perfect pitch. When people have an idea, I hear this all the time from bankers or whatever, where they can go and it’s like, “I don’t know there was nothing, there was no meat on the bones.”
Paul: Right.
John: Or “The pitch was bad.”
Paul: Right.
John: What’s a good pitch?
Paul: Understanding your audience. It all comes down to understanding your audience and that touches on why we’re so passionate about, media in general. You mentioned advertising and marketing earlier and how it’s changing. Fundamentally, advertising and marketing isn’t changing. Our methodology, our tools are changing, but at the end of the day, it’s all about understanding your audience and delivering right message in the right form and in the right format.
The perfect pitch, the imperfect pitch tends to miss that, tends to start by explaining what it is that you’re doing. I want to build an application to help musicians find great venues in Austin and that’s a great idea, it’s a noble idea and yet if you’re a bank, if you’re a venture capitalist, if you’re a large advertising sponsor, you’re immediately going to wonder how well that’s going? How much traction do you have? Do you have customers? Can you show it to me yet? Is it ready?
John: Right.
Paul: As opposed to appreciating that the audience for such a thing in this context is somebody’s got to write a check and they’re going to need return of some kind. So instead what’s the opportunity? The opportunity is that there are an exceptional numbers of historic, creative, modern, metropolitan, major and minor venues for musicians in a place like Austin. There are hundreds of them. How do you find the best experience for musician who perhaps can’t afford very much?
John: Right.
Paul: How do find the best experience for a talented band that can easily pull together 10,000 people?
John: Right.
Paul: Do you need all of the traditional models? Do you need the entire team of folks that puts together a concert for you?
John: Right.
Paul: Because in technology today, you don’t.
John: Right.
Paul: We work in that space. There’s a decent lead to a pitch I think. We work in that space, we’re going to make that possible.
John: Right.
Paul: For musicians to throw their own events, throw their own concerts, and find their own audience.
John: Right.
Paul: Find their own voice.
John: Right.
Paul: Successfully.
John: Right.
Paul: Substantially.
John: Right.
Paul: Who doesn’t want to get behind that?
John: Right. Well, that’s cool. I mean that takes again a couple things of advertising like good advertising marketing is always about knowing who you’re talking to?
Paul: Yes.
John: And then the part you add on to it is to create a people. A good idea isn’t enough, you have—there has to be an ability, we’re in a capitalist society, there’s has to be the ability to monetize and make money because other people don’t necessarily just get off and like, “What? Wow what a cool idea that would be.”, even if it made no money.
Paul: Sure. True. Well, that’s why I think the perfect pitch starts that way because the way you fail to reach an audience is to start with something that someone will disagree with or not be interested in, or not care about. How can you communicate in such a way that everybody is going to be get excited about what you’re doing, whether they’re actually going to invest or not?
That at least get the idea, they like the idea. It makes sense. They’re willing to help in some way because you’re right, the challenge is that not only are a lot of media entities like bands and film makers not necessarily savvy business folks but frankly neither a small business is. They’re focused on building the restaurant, they’re focused on serving their customers and dealing with things like accounting and bookkeeping, little on marketing, understanding AdWords, doing email. Not only is it not something most people are familiar with, it’s frankly genuinely something that they just don’t care about and they shouldn’t.
The pressure about what they do. And so, how can we change that? How can we help them better reach the people that they need to reach in order to be successful? By providing some of those services, the technology, those platforms that they don’t necessarily even want to learn how to use but they need to. They know they need to.
John: So that’s why I called you a futurist because I think so much what we’re seeing in this economy right now, previous generations maybe it wouldn’t work for big company and that company would take care of you for the rest of your life, your family and stuff. That’s just not reality as much now, there are going to be a lot more entrepreneurial things. The countries changing, the economy is changing. You‘re a big fan of data, I know that. Let’s talk a little bit about like how data helps facilitate this stuff and really the importance of data starting with like finding the audience, finding where—finding what the reality is?
How data helps facilitate innovation and funding
Paul: Right, sure. That’s a wonderful question because I think in a future sense, I think we get burdened as business owners, as entrepreneurs, we get burdened with the ideas of big data, the ideas of the social graph. What is the social graph? We get burdened, we get challenged by the encouragement to use Google Analytics. I don’t even know how to start? But apparently, I have to code to use Google Analytics and I like to encourage folks that the idea of using data and the importance of data is much, much, much more simple than that.
Ask the questions and think about where you can get information with regards to those questions. One of the beautiful things that the internet did in frankly, disrupting and making it a little bit more difficult for media, for musicians.
One of the beautiful things that the internet actually did was it—assured us into this information age. The data comes from simply searching Google. Data comes from asking a question on LinkedIn or on Quora. Data comes from building an audience on Facebook, even before you have a business. Build an army is on Facebook and start to pay attention to what they’re excited about, what they are paying attention to, what they reacted to.
And I give you a sense for what you could be doing or should be doing. And an easier way into, is your way into the data that’s out there. These are ways into putting analytics on your website. Why? Because analytics isn’t about measuring conversion rates and where the traffic is coming and these more sophisticated marketing questions.
It really gets back to the basic marketing questions, from physically where? Where it’s coming? Are people coming from New York? Am I getting an audience out of India? What I do with that? That’s magical.
That’s insightful in terms of figuring out whether or not you should just take a local ad out, the newspaper. Should you take a local ad out in a newspaper in Dallas? If nobody in Dallas even knows that you exist yet or they’re paying attention. Maybe, maybe not.
John: So there really is getting a data really in its simplest form that a lot people don’t necessarily realize. See, in most coming in everybody knows now data, data is everything. I got to get into data, if you get some data, I have to analyze the data. I don’t always think that they know exactly what that means but in essence data’s just intelligence, data’s just the truth about what’s really happening out there. That is what I think is really part of what’s fascinating about what you’re doing and part what’s fascinating about the disruption in the world right now. Old media, let’s look at the last election, just as a platforms of old media and new media.
Paul: Sure.
John: Old media said, this is going to happen and this is completely going to happen. The left coast and the right coast are saying that this is going to happen. Reality comes in and old media missed it, 100%. What is going on with—couldn’t data have maybe said that had somebody analyzed it more correctly than it’s like, this isn’t the luck that you think it is.
Paul: It’s a wonderful question because it’s—could data have given us more accurate insights to what is happening. Yes, data is still not that accessible. The challenge with most of this platform is it is information, it is truthful, but you still have to understand what it’s telling you. You still need those CMO’s, you still need the companies like Epson as I understand. You still need folks that know how to interpret it. And that’s what’s interesting about the old media world versus the new. The old media world was trained in focus groups and how to interpret studies and how to avoid confirmation bias, at this tendency that we have to look for data that affirms what we want. And the challenge with new media is it actually making it easier for us, easier for us to make those mistakes. It’s easier for us to find the people on social media who agree with us, therefore I must be right. John: We think the way we do.
Paul: Right. Everybody else thinks the way I do. I must be the answer. And so, while data is more available, it’s more accessible, we do still have to practice the traditional marketing techniques that being on AdWords, for example, is not marketing, being on AdWords means you have a marketing channel in place. Whether or not you should or whether or not you’re doing it well, whether or not you know what it’s doing for you, that’s what marketing is. That’s what marketing is and it’s challenging.
John: So it’s really, if you use it properly, data can challenge the conventional wisdom, if you use it properly but you have to be willing to look at the good, the bad, the ugly, see if it’s works and all versus than just the step that you agree with.
Paul: Certainly, I think so. And you could argue, I think you could argue that the data in the last, the previous election, was there too. It was there too but you have to appreciate, for example, you have to appreciate that the coasts and major cities tend to be a little bit more involved on the internet.
They tend to be younger populations, they tend to be more technically involved. And so, 10 years ago, certainly 15-20 years ago, when I started on Yahoo, there would certainly be a bias perhaps in information on the internet with regard to politics because the cities are more involved. In the slightest election, that’s certainly started to change. In fact, the entire world is much more involved on the internet. And so, we’re reaching a point where we can start to measure everybody everywhere. Throughout the world and figure out what we might do and might want to do, perhaps should do. And so, that bias is being eliminated simply by the fact that our sample size is more inclusive, it’s more comprehensive of everyone. And so, is that what happened in the last election, our sample size opened up to a lot of people that we weren’t measuring before, that we weren’t talking to before.
John: Or didn’t have a voice.
Paul: Exactly.
John: Right.
Paul: Exactly.
The Shift to the Center of the U.S.
John: So it’s interesting. Your company, you’re Silicon Valley trained, I appreciate it. Certainly no follow both coasts but she kind of located right here in the center of America. Is this something to that we are going to see more again thinking down the road a little bit, the coast clearly kind of own the media?
Paul: Some.
John: Yes. Somewhat but definitely like the key influencing things. Are we in the start to see like because of digital data, all these things, a shift in that way or like to more on the center of America?
Paul: We already are.
John: Okay.
Paul: We already are, so MediaTech Ventures is based here but we don’t just work here. We’re based here for a reason and it’s that we are already seeing that migration. We did a study 5 years ago about the immigration patterns within the country. Where are people moving and why? And true enough they’re leaving the coast, they’re coming out of Silicon Valley, they’re coming out of LA, they’re coming out of New York, and they’re coming to the central core of the country, they’re coming to Chicago, they’re coming to Austin, Dallas, Houston, are exploding as well.
And that struck us as one the most interesting things that we might ask of what’s going on in the United States. Not just that they’re moving but who’s moving and why? And what we noticed in Austin and in the rest of Texas for that matter, is that the folks moving aren’t coming out of the front into the media industry, if that’s a good way to characterize it.
The actors aren’t coming from Hollywood. The anchor folks in the news media industry in New York aren’t coming to Texas. The people that are moving are the technical folks, the technical skill sets, the sound engineers, the producers, the video game developers.
And what’s been fascinating since then is seeing the big companies validate, validate that idea that Conde Nast move their digital team to Austin just last year. Comcast is moving their media R&D team to Austin this year. Certain Xfinity who folks should know because they created Halo and cable TV, just moved their entire company to North Austin, that the big businesses are realizing that there’s a wonderful convergence here, not just to media and technology but other—in the creative professions, the artistic professions. With the coders, with the talent, with the engineers, and with the folks leaving the coast, well yes, they do dominate the media but they dominate an aspect of the media.
Nobody thinks of Silicon Valley as being the film industry, because it’s not. But Austin has a film industry and has software developers and technology professionals, its we’re able to rethink, we’re able to really embrace and understand what’s going on in video here because of that cross pollination of skills sets and talented experiences.
John: So that’s cool because again like money makes everything move, money makes stuff happen. If money is going there, if support stuff is going there, artists will follow. And artist also I mean there’s a reality of like the coast have gotten pretty expensive. So just the fact that a life can be kind of built in some place more easily and still get—still have access to the world. That’s pretty cool. That’s disruptive.
Paul: That’s disruptive. And what I’m concerned about, what we really get passionate about is again the question of where the capital goes? So if I put my venture capitalist head on and take off the media tech, if the venture capitalist in me acknowledges that, there’s actually a plus side to the fact that the coasts are expensive.
And if you think about that, why on earth would that be a positive, why on earth would the fact that it could cost a lot more to higher people? Your benefit to the investment community and it becomes apparent when you compare it to these lower cost economies that if you take a company out of Saint Louise or Denver, one of the cheaper economies, less expensive economies. And you take that exact same company and you build that in San Francisco, exact same company or really is equal.
The fact is, the bottom line is the company in San Francisco is going to half to raise more money. They’re going to be more aggressive about it, they’re going to focus on raising more capital simply to afford what it takes to do there. And so, when those announcements are made about those two companies raising capital, one has raised $500,000, the other one has raised $3 million, which one does the world pay attention to? Which one does the world perceive as having a more substantial opportunity? It’s not necessarily the one on the coast, not necessarily, but it looks that way.
And the challenge in the venture capital ecosystem is that at the end of the day, our job is to raise the capital, our job is not to write the checks to the startups, that’s what angel investors do. Our job is to raise the capital to make it available to entrepreneurs. And so, the question of the perception matters to investors. If you’re an investor, don’t I want to be where the raising $3 million and delivering billion dollar returns and these unicorn startups.
Why would I want to be we’re things are smaller? Well, short answers because it is easier to start a business here. It is less expensive, it is more likely that you have a positive outcome, though may not be a substantial an outcome. And so the important to the media side what we’re doing, the importance of you’re doing is educating all sides of the economy, all sides of the equation. There’s a cost and benefit, there’s a pro and con to just about everything. Make sure you understand where you are and why, where you are and why.
John: This is a fascinating conversation and also is really kind of getting into the complexities of business, data, creativity and how they come together and we’re going to keep it going. One thing that you talked about, you say, in addition to all the other things that you do, you’re a part-time CMO.
The Part Time CMO
Paul: Sure.
John: So, top job anymore, CMO’s are like full time CMO’s have a very short life span. It seems like in these big businesses that the average and others saying is like 24 months or something like that. But let’s start to delve into this world a little bit. What exactly like you’re CMO, you got a new job, what’s the first thing that you should do?
Paul: Grasp the breath of what a company is doing, of what the business is doing, and I mean the breath; the financials, the hiring practices, the trends in the industry occurs, see most on that part. But I find that most marketing professionals don’t necessarily embrace the fact that their job is product development as much as it is, audience development. And the only way to do that well for business is to be as intimately involved as the CEO.
There have been some wonderful articles written about the idea that the CMO is the new CEO that this discussion we’ve been having about data and the importance of marketing is ever more significant than it used to be. How can you run a company well if you’re wearing that hat of cheap marketing office? And I think the reason that it changes so much. The reason that the life span of a CMO seems short is because things change so quickly.
The ability to keep up with what Facebook’s going to do tomorrow or the best way to manage your CRM with your sales force, it’s going to be completely different in month. And so, companies to some extent rightly need to transition through folks as they grow. I don’t think there’s any wrong with that.
That’s why this idea of part-time has merit, we are more entrepreneurial ecosystem. How does an entrepreneur get the experience, and the talent, and the resources they need at the time they need it? On demand at a cost they can manage?
John: So you’re talking about something that I think is interesting. The CMO’s of today, his or her job is much more complicated than a CMO of yesterday.
Paul: Sure. Yes.
John: Than it used to be to simplify to its most simple. CMO used to be really in charge of the company’s message, its narrative. And that would have pretty relatively few outlets for that. You put out some TV ads, you put out some finance, and it hopefully arrive at a campaign idea kind of work. People are more, less forced to see it. That’s completely off the table now and I think what’s really happened is a CMO is a growth officer. Now, companies really look at like marketing is really a growth engine. And how—I need to make sure that this brand is selling, right? That’s a huge thing, the money trail.
Paul: It is a huge thing and yet I still believe passionately that the challenge we have is that the internet changed everything and we’re still simply trying to figure out what that means. That the role of the CMO has changed but not as substantially as it might seem in the sense that what we simply have are more resources, more options at our disposal. Whether or not you should put an ad on Google, it’s the same question as to whether or not you should put an ad on a billboard of the free way. We have the means now of better measuring which of those things works and why.
John: So that really is the key. A CMO of the future or of now really need to take this data thing seriously because you really need to kind of look at like where these buyers, how they’re acting, because it’s a lot different than it used to be. But if you use that, then the job becomes much what it was anyway. It’s still building the narrative and still putting the narrative out there but it’s just putting it out in a different way than you typically think about.
Paul: Yes, and you have to appreciate that today someone has going to have a VR head set on. That the consumer, that even your potential partner if you’re in BDB or in an enterprise company. Your audience is being bombarded and has access to just as many opportunities as you do. As the marketing professional, how can you possibly reach them all through anyone channel? The answer is you can’t. You’re absolutely can’t. It’s all the more reason you have to understand who your customer is, who your audience is, and how to reach them, how and where to reach them?
One of the most exciting examples of that that we’ve discovered is how efficient and effective and inexpensive, radio still remains. Folks want to say that podcasting is disrupting radio and it’s not. It’s new, it’s exciting, it’s not more disrupting radio than the internet, actually disrupted print. Do we not use print anymore? No, we actually certainly do still, we use print; it’s very different but we certainly still use it.
And the exciting fact in that context is if you think about it and then instead of, is just audio, your business how does your business reach people through audio, what your podcasting? You could stream yourself pretty easily and radio, hyper local radio is paid attention to, it’s listened to, it’s relatively inexpensive, it’s a great medium that we’ve disregarded a bit.
John: Now, I—
Paul: Because our fascination with video and the internet.
John: I agree. And it’s a captive audience.
Paul: Right.
John: If you look at traffic times and big urban cities and stuff right now, those are just going up and up and up. You have a captive audience for an hour that you can reach efficiently. That is—that’s a great medium.
Paul: It’s brilliant. It’s brilliant for local businesses.
John: And it’s a mass medium.
Paul: Right. Right.
John: There’s a difference, isn’t there like as we talked about digital, we get into the world like content and stuff. But the mass media is still has a place because people react differently to a mass message than to a personal message. It’s still galvanizes it in a different way, right?
Paul: It does. I think what’s been interesting to watch with regard to the implication of mass media is evident to news and with journalists. In that the idea of citizen journalism, and the idea that anyone can write a blog and the idea that anybody can have an audience in social media has done a number on the news. It really has. But we’re waking up to the fact that noise, breadth of content, isn’t necessarily the same as quantity or excuse me, as quality.
John: Quality of content.
Paul: Quality of content, right. And what’s exciting about the media industry and things like 360 video and live streaming and podcasting is that the expectation that I think the audience has of media professionals like yourself. The on air individual, the expectation has shifted from being someone to whom we just subscribed, to whom we just listened to, we just read the Wall Street Journal. Now, I want to talk to, I want to tweet with Walt Mossberg. I want to go an event with some 360 gear on where I can see Kara Swisher and maybe even chat with her. That the role of media is changing.
The media professional is changing from that of merely being one way about to being two way and I think that’s exciting because we’re realizing that the amount of information is valuable because it’s data. And as a consumer of information, I can now have a personal experience not just with the news journalism but the same as through a musician, the same as through with an actor, the same as through with a designer or video game developer. That my experience with your brand is different, I cannot talk to you, I can now enjoy my experience with you, really get to know you and better appreciate what you’re saying and whether or not I believe or I agree with what you’re saying. It brings a new way of finding credibility in the news.
John: So quality of content though is the key to make it all work.
Paul: Unequivocally.
John: Because it was a Wild West Show, at first everybody was out there and putting stuff out and I was like, “Oh my God, anybody can do this.” But it did just become what we used to call clutter, noise, and now like even a brand, a good brand has an opportunity like never before because it’s going to have some credibility and ability to like I want to engage to them.
Paul: What’s fun and exciting to watch is how these mediums are available to everyone and how it’s then difficult and challenging though to figure out where best to represent your brand. Where as a business, as a musician, to show yourself off, to be a part of that experience. I for example, I like to write and I’ve got a descent sized audience on Twitter because of that. Focus all the time, tell me that I should be doing a video series on YouTube. That’s not my thing. That’s not how I work. It’s exciting to chat with startups and business professionals and entrepreneurs about the idea that, the best way to leverage the media is to think about yourself.
Just think about your person and don’t think about the business and the brand. Think about what you do. What you’re comfortable with. If you’re not the type of person to be engaging on Facebook, don’t worry about being on Facebook. You don’t have to be everywhere because though your audience is now everywhere and is easily distracted, what people are looking for is that engagement, that personal experience with you as a brand.
John: That’s actually a huge thing. We talked about it too. You’re heading on the notion of reinvention. You constantly have to reinvent, right? Just as especially now, in this new age, it’s like you can’t fail for very long the way you used to.
Paul: Two thoughts if I could give you one. I love the idea of reinvention first because you might get a sense for it but I just started out in radio and so I’m very passionate about that side of the industry. Ended up in the internet because of Yahoo and because of Yahoo I ended up in e-commerce in Hewlett-Packard. So I’m reinventing myself a couple times early in my career. Ended up in Hewlett-Packard and the search marketing industry, so I got the online media aspect to what I’m doing to.
And in working in e-commerce I failed a lot, I failed substantially, on a couple of occasions. And what it taught me though was how to discover myself. How I realize, how I ended up in e-commerce at Hewlett-Packard because it was the right fit at the right time. I was good at it. I could help them of what they needed at that time but it wasn’t really me, it wasn’t and I didn’t represent who I am. It took me a while to figure out that my roots we’re at this convergence back with my radio experience, back with my online media experience. Tying those things together.
And what I challenged was your first—your second thought though, the way that we can do that, the way that we can discover ourselves, the way that we seriously going to think about it, the way I define success is not avoiding failure, is not overcoming failure, it’s not the opposite of failure; it’s in fact, being comfortable with it, being comfortable in your own skin recognizing that no amount of success that I might have or you might have will still result in failure. I’m still going to make some mistakes. We’re going to make some bad decisions and that’s okay because now I’m doing what I love, I’m doing what I’m passionate about. The faster I can fail, frankly, I think the better. Let’s try things, let’s move, let’s hit it, let’s recognize, let’s use data, let’s recognize when we shouldn’t do that anymore and go back and do something different that might work.
John: So that’s really the crux of it for an entrepreneur or entrepreneurial thinker. Embracing the fear because that’s you’re going to have fear at first, but then knowing that you’re going to fail, the fear kind of goes away and you turn that into learning. That in the essence becomes your own data.
Paul: Right. And so, a local entrepreneur, the President of Indeed, beautiful search platform, a search technology for finding jobs and recruiting. The President was on the radio just last week, I heard it him on the radio and he said, “The epitome of a good entrepreneur is equal parts Don Quixote and Mr. Spock.”
John: Okay.
Paul: You have to wake up in the morning, every morning, certain that everybody else is wrong, that your dream is right, that no one can tell you, “No.” But then also looking at things logically, looking at the data, and making conclusions based on what’s happening very, very quickly. That’s the only way to overcome fear I think is to have that overconfidence perhaps that I don’t necessarily exactly know what I’m doing but I know we’re doing it right and I know we’re going to make it and I know we’re going to succeed. And let me go check and make sure that we are actually doing that.
John: Being very left brain, right brain?
Paul: Yes, exactly.
John: You have to do that. I think you hit on another notion that is important especially like as a young person, you kind of have to have a strategy on like what success looks like to you, in a way, as a person. But you constantly reevaluating yourself to find like, “Okay, what are my core strengths, what am I good at, what am I not good at?” Because sometimes I think of myself as a young man, I thought I was good at everything. No, like—no, I can do that, I can dot that. But as life goes on, as you fail, you do kind of come back to like—well, like can sort of do everything but here’s like the one, the five things that I’m actually that I may be really good at or better than other people. Does that sound familiar?
Paul: It sounds important, it sounds critical, and it does come from our experiences as children, frankly. I’m involved with a wonderful new program here called “Pitch-a-Kid”. Pitch-a-Kid, where entrepreneurs and start up founders our age, have to get in front of an audience of kids and give them their pitch, to talk back to the idea of the pitch. And the feedback, the questions, the challenges that kids will give an experienced professional, they don’t care if you’re Bill Gates. They will ask you the most eye opening brilliant questions because they don’t have that fear and they’re willing to make those mistakes because they don’t see them yet as mistakes, they don’t see them yet as failures. They see them as questions and opportunity to learn.
I was no football player. I tried to be. Everybody wants to play football. I was no football player so I didn’t try for too long. I discovered that I was pretty good at swimming and so I get into swimming. That philosophy, that childhood spirit, that desire to learn, that desire to build, that’s what we need to retain, that’s what STEM education, needs to retain that as kids grow up and go through university systems, that doesn’t get beaten out of them, might that you retain the accelerance for asking question and making some mistakes and finding what’s right for you.
John: And good for successful business person. To realize I think that no matter how high you get up or how good you think you are, you really have to surround yourself with some people who aren’t afraid to say the upper has no clothes.
Paul: , that’s exactly right.
John: Because—
Paul: I like to use the “Your baby is ugly” reference. In the startup community a lot, I love your pitch, it’s a good idea, its “Oh a little ugly.” Because the fact is that’s helpful, right? Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. A little too much praise, little too much exuberance for what you’re doing can be a bad thing, frankly. Especially as an entrepreneur, you need to avoid, avoid. Not intentionally but you need to be able to step around and identify those mistakes and so it’s critical to have people around you who frankly are better at what you’re doing than you are.
The CEO’s job is to find people much, much more capable than they are and that’s strategy. The strategy is how the CMO, how the CEO, how the CTO helps do that. They provide a North Star that the team, the experienced, talented team of folks that can code or design, or build, or communicate more effectively than they can. They’re the ones who build the company based on that objective, based on that North Star. And again we’re going to deviate left and then we’re going to deviate right. We’re just going to keep you on the same track.
John: That’s a good management insight too because I think that the big problem a lot of managers make no matter what it is, micromanaging, thinking that they have to do every single part and that’s actually absolutely wrong.
Paul: It’s entirely wrong and it’s most difficult in the context of this newer theme of a lean startup of boot strap startup and chasing customers, revenue and selling things quickly, find revenue quickly. Because at the end of the day the founder or the CEO of a business will always be the best sales person for whatever that is and yet as the CEO or the founder of a business, you got a million other things you need to be doing.
And at the end of the day, as you bring on sales professionals, even if it’s the best sales professional in the world, it’s entirely likely that there are not as good as you at selling your own thing. Because you can make whatever decision you want. I can sit down with you and say, “Yep, we take that deal”, “We’ll sign right now”, and “Close the business.” And so the CEO, the small businesses are absolutely has to get comfortable with realizing that, they’re in capable of building a business on their own shoulders, that you need those professionals who have the experience, have the reputation of being excellent in your industry so that again so you can steer the ship and they can run it and any make sure it doesn’t sink.
John: Great lesson. Kind of as we wrap up, just one final thing if we could encapsulate it. I think everybody who comes to you or whatever it’s like I want to start a business, I want it to be successful. Somebody had to just say if you could tell him one thing like, “This is what it takes to be successful.” I know it’s a lot of things but there is a North Star of success.
Paul: Is there a North Star of success? I think you, I’m a big fan of Simon Sinek’s work, Start with Why? I’m also a big fan of an old economist, Peter Drucker’s work, he wrote a book called Innovation and Entrepreneurship, which most people these days don’t read because it was written back in the 80’s. It’s on the news to start a book these days. You read those two books and I think it answers that question that Peter Drucker made the point that only two things matter. Only two things create value in business, innovation which we’ve been talking about, and marketing, which we’ve been talking about. And he added marketing is the one that distinguishes the businesses, right? We want to think that’s it’s the innovation like if you invent something, you’ve got something distinct. It’s actually not that; it’s the marketing.
Apple, Apple is not Hewlett-Packard because of the marketing, because of the experience and the brand. And the only way to arrive at that is to understand the why? Understand your why. Why is it that we’re doing this? Why is it that anyone will care? Why is it that a bank or an investor, or a customer, or a partner will care? Why is it that we’re going in this direction and not on that direction? That’s the most difficult question asked but it’s also the most important because how you do what you’re doing, what you do, when you do things, where? Whether or not you do it in Chicago, or in Austin, or in Silicon Valley, depends first on understanding why you’re doing it.
So start why and appreciate that the idea of both innovation and marketing are critical to that path, critical to that path. Those three things though, why marketing and innovation are what’s going to get you there and start with those things before you even invest a dollar in filing an LLC, filing a patent, building a company; start with those fundamental questions because that’s what’s it will foster the passion that other people have for what you’re doing.
John: I love it. Actually I think that fits completely with just a notion of what advertising marketing is always about. It’s retell the narrative and whatever you make, there’s a narrative that makes it different and stick to the narrative. We talked about that a lot in our own company so I think that’s a fascinating way of looking at it.
Paul: Good. I look forward to hearing these stories, these narratives that you guys put together here. We’re trying to tell a lot more stories out of Austin and there’s some great video experiences, blogs, podcasting and audio experiences coming out of this part of the world because as you can imagine, as we think about those narratives and where they’re coming from. Everybody’s wondering why and how Texas is doing so well and I’m excited to be a part of telling those stories whether or not it’s through the venture capital ecosystem, or I’m involved in a venture capital firm called 1839 Ventures or through what we’re doing in MediaTech Ventures. These narratives are going to get folks a glimpse of what we’re doing in this part of the world.
John: That’s cool. I mean, I think South by Southwest is a great example of it. It’s where technology and creativity and all these things come together. Data, I mean it’s really cool. I think it is blazing a trail for the rest of the world so very cool things coming out of here.
Paul: Incredibly, and what’s exciting is that the buzz, the local buzz in Austin. This year, we’ve been having it for a few years but the local buzz is that you all realize Austin is always like this. Austin is always like South by Southwest, not as big of course. We have 300,000 people here for the next week but we’re always involved in live music, video games, film, data platforms, mobile experiences, audio and podcasting that you can head up to road tomorrow and go hang out with EA, and go hang out with the IBM Design Labs in Austin. That’s the character, that’s the narrative of Austin; that the experience you have in doing something like South by Southwest is why you should be here all the time.
John: Yes, it’s cool. And you should keep Austin weird.
Paul: We’re trying.
John: Okay. Good. Well, listen I really enjoyed our talkfest. Anyway, I really appreciate you coming down here to share some of your insights and knowledge and good luck to you with moving forward.
Paul: Cheers to that. Thank you very much.
John: Have fun.
Paul: Thank you.
Music playing
Conversations with Giants is produced by EON Content Labs and brought to you by Epsilon, “We see what others don’t.” All comments, discussions, materials, and information provided by participants in Conversations with Giants are strictly their own opinion and do not constitute any official position or views of Epsilon. Please refer to our terms of views for more information.
