<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>clue free &#187; advertising</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cluefree.org/tags/advertising/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cluefree.org</link>
	<description>huh? huh.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 17:55:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Readability</title>
		<link>http://cluefree.org/2009/03/04/readability/</link>
		<comments>http://cluefree.org/2009/03/04/readability/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:09:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Raju</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Rants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bookmarklets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[content]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trust your users]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cluefree.org/?p=621</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 80s marketing term &#8220;user friendly&#8221; begat one of the classic Unix quips: &#8220;Unix is user-hostile&#8221; (or: &#8220;Unix is user-friendly. It&#8217;s just very  selective about who its friends are.&#8221;) Web portals, everyone&#8217;s favorite 90s busybox, very quickly became user hostile as distractions were, well, kind of their whole purpose.

Readability is a useful/controversial bookmarklet that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 80s marketing term &#8220;user friendly&#8221; begat one of the classic Unix quips: &#8220;Unix is user-hostile&#8221; (or: &#8220;<span class="quote">Unix <em>is </em>user-friendly. It&#8217;s just very  selective about who its friends are.&#8221;) Web portals, everyone&#8217;s favorite 90s <a href="http://www.maccoupon.com/Mar2003/busy_box.jpg">busybox</a>, very quickly became user hostile as distractions were, well, kind of their whole purpose.<br />
</span></p>
<p><a href="http://lab.arc90.com/2009/03/readability.php">Readability</a> is a useful/controversial bookmarklet that strips away all the crap you find in typical web portals these days:</p>
<p><embed src="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=3445774&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;show_title=1&amp;show_byline=0&amp;show_portrait=0&amp;color=ffffff&amp;fullscreen=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="400" height="300"></embed></p>
<p><span class="quote">Even though <a href="http://adblockplus.org">AdBlock Plus</a> has nigh-magical abilities to make <a href="http://weather.com">certain websites</a> bearable, the problem has gone beyond paid-placement ads as the site itself is screaming almost as loudly to draw you into another of its corners, <strong>like Wikipedia with colors</strong>. As the <a href="http://alistapart.com/articles/indefenseofreaders">ALA article</a> mentions, what should be an act of &#8220;reading&#8221; withers to &#8220;browsing&#8221;, a descriptor that was okay-I-guess in the era of <strong>black &amp; white internet</strong> (which, ironically, grew out of a no-design, content-heavy, academics-only web.)<br />
</span></p>
<p><span class="quote">I don&#8217;t agree that publishers &#8220;just need to find something users are willing to pay for&#8221; (they won&#8217;t, and neither will they.) But I do think that a page could be taken from the attitude some forward-thinking internet music/game vendors have taken, which is to <strong>trust your users</strong>. While everyone else was DRMing everything up, these guys took a step back and said, &#8220;hey, if they&#8217;re already trying to pay us, why don&#8217;t we <em>not </em>assume they&#8217;re trying to steal?&#8221; The nuance in publishing is different, but the attitude is the same: goad the user into pursuing topics/authors further, and if you&#8217;ve done your job right, they probably will. &#8220;People get disinterested halfway through! We need to keep pulling them through to other pages!&#8221; Oh, boo hoo. They&#8217;ll probably be back tomorrow, and maybe next week. Until they figure out your content sucks and they move on to your competitors. You got the short-term ad bucks, but lost the war.<br />
</span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://cluefree.org/2009/03/04/readability/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Beautiful</title>
		<link>http://cluefree.org/2009/01/13/beautiful/</link>
		<comments>http://cluefree.org/2009/01/13/beautiful/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:26:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Raju</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Photoshop]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cluefree.org/?p=480</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
Adbusting in Berlin: Yet another artist reminds us that models are Photoshopped.
Who are the art directors on these projects, anyway? When I learned retouching, one of the guidelines was to make sure to look away from time to time to &#8220;recalibrate&#8221; your eyes according to reality. So is everyone involved in these productions working alone [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.brainstorm9.com.br/2009/01/12/photoshop-adbusting-em-berlim/"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-484" title="christinashop" src="http://cluefree.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/christinashop.jpg" alt="christinashop" width="157" height="86" /></a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.brainstorm9.com.br/2009/01/12/photoshop-adbusting-em-berlim/">Adbusting in Berlin</a>: Yet another artist reminds us that <a title="Hillary Duff" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8_mVF28VAQ&amp;feature=related">models</a> <a title="That Dove ad everyone's seen" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcFlxSlOKNI&amp;NR=1">are</a> <a title="Losing Weight with Photoshop" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFwFOH6h4lo&amp;feature=related">Photoshopped</a>.</p>
<p>Who are the art directors on these projects, anyway? When I learned retouching, one of the guidelines was to make sure to look away from time to time to &#8220;recalibrate&#8221; your eyes according to reality. So is everyone involved in these productions working alone in windowless rooms? Christina, for example, hasn&#8217;t looked human in print for as long as I can remember; and what does her stylist have to do to maintain the illusion in motion?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://cluefree.org/2009/01/13/beautiful/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
