<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: First &#8220;Who&#8221;, then &#8220;What&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.connectioneconomy.com/2005/08/30/first-who-then-what/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.connectioneconomy.com/2005/08/30/first-who-then-what/</link>
	<description>Blogging about Tomorrow&#039;s world Today</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 07:20:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: eMerging</title>
		<link>http://www.connectioneconomy.com/2005/08/30/first-who-then-what/comment-page-1/#comment-545</link>
		<dc:creator>eMerging</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2005 23:33:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tmtd.biz/2005/08/30/first-who-then-what/#comment-545</guid>
		<description>I know we are limited to the widely understood terms, but I would love to see a name change (resulting in attitude change) of the words &quot;marketers&quot;, &quot;selling&quot;, &quot;target audience&quot; and &quot;attack&quot;.  These all imply the fundamental problem in communication.  An &quot;us and them&quot; attitude doesn&#039;t work when the &#039;market&#039; is smarter than the &#039;sellers&#039;.  This is partially addressed in your &quot;WHY&quot; that you would like to add to Paul&#039;s article (I once wrote one called &quot;The Wise in Why&#039;s&quot;). The point is, would you try to sell something to a friend or peer using any one of the &#039;marketing&#039; tools that companies have traditionally used?  I suspect we would feel pretty silly doing that.  An open conversation in an open economy requires open communication.  Authentic and honest.  Like having a one on one conversation with a friend.  No more, no less.  Blogs are one of the tools that invite us to do this.  The challenge is for marketers to find their authentic voices or to hand over the &#039;marketing&#039; to their customers instead :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know we are limited to the widely understood terms, but I would love to see a name change (resulting in attitude change) of the words &#8220;marketers&#8221;, &#8220;selling&#8221;, &#8220;target audience&#8221; and &#8220;attack&#8221;.  These all imply the fundamental problem in communication.  An &#8220;us and them&#8221; attitude doesn&#8217;t work when the &#8216;market&#8217; is smarter than the &#8217;sellers&#8217;.  This is partially addressed in your &#8220;WHY&#8221; that you would like to add to Paul&#8217;s article (I once wrote one called &#8220;The Wise in Why&#8217;s&#8221;). The point is, would you try to sell something to a friend or peer using any one of the &#8216;marketing&#8217; tools that companies have traditionally used?  I suspect we would feel pretty silly doing that.  An open conversation in an open economy requires open communication.  Authentic and honest.  Like having a one on one conversation with a friend.  No more, no less.  Blogs are one of the tools that invite us to do this.  The challenge is for marketers to find their authentic voices or to hand over the &#8216;marketing&#8217; to their customers instead <img src='http://www.connectioneconomy.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
