Björk and Tina Brown have many differences but one common problem: They are watching the boat beneath them sink. Their print and music industries are being disintermediated by the digital revolution. They are struggling to respond to the blue-ocean and white-space and black-swan disruption that besets us all.
For more of this post, please go to the full post on the Harvard Business Review blog by clicking HERE.
using old forms for new purposes.
After World War II, on the campus of the University of British Columbia, people took the quonset huts that had housed soliders and turned them into classrooms.
Old form, new purpose.
But there is nothing really all that creative about the quonset hut conversion. In both cases, old and new, the hut serves as shelter.
What’s more interesting is when we find a new application for something old.
Exhibit 1
I am corresponding with a woman called Barbara Monteiro. Barbara has this amazing email style. She starts her message in the subject heading and then at some point leaps into the text. It gives her emails pace and a certain breathless excitement. And in what 10 years of email it’s the first time, I’ve seen email “reinvented” in this way.
Exhibit 2
This morning I came upon a Pinterest site by Ryan Zeigler that uses the 9 picture grid to compose a single photo. Very clear. http://pinterest.com/ryanjz/
Exhibit 3
In Culturematic, I describe the case of Fantasy football which found a way to repurpose the statistical data pouring out of the NFL to a new and very lucrative purpose.
More on this theme later. The client is waiting for me!
My local library recently did a sleep over. Not for local kids. But their toys.
Brilliant. Here, I thought, was a brilliant little Culturematic to change the way people, and especially kids, thought about their library.
Please come to HBR and see the full essay. Click here.
I have been digging around doing research for the new book. And I just came across a not-agency called Breakfast. It sounds like a Culturematic powerhouse.
It is also very likable. Breakfast has done several brilliant things, including:
1. A bike called Precious that reported its experience was ridden across the country.
“Precious’s brain is an on-board device that captures all of his experiences, combined with a cloud-based system that analyzes those experiences. Put this all together and get a bike that’s able to express itself in his own words. He shares his up-to-the-moment thoughts and has a subconscious which allows him to dream about all he’s been through.” (from the Breakfast website: http://www.breakfastny.com)
2. A red phone that they leave with prospective clients. The client only needs to pick up the phone to be put in touch with one of the Breakfast partners.
I am honestly not sure how this works, but I think the idea is that Breakfast leaves the phone at the clients without much explanation. Who can resist picking up a red phone, especially when it has a blinking red light?
Client reaction? Here’s one, transcribed from the Breakfast website. It is the Senior Vice President of Entertainment Marketing at Turner. She says “This is the coolest thing I have had any agency send! This is awesome!!!”
3. All of this is done in a manner of that is as seeking, forthright, and scientific as possible. See the “full disclosure” diagram above and especially its “seperatory funnel” and “client fluid.” The Breakfast website sums things up:
Just like the brilliant Edison and Bell discovered, inventing groundbreaking technology doesn’t happen first go. Think, draw, prototype, break. Then do it all again. We take pride in the fact that we break a lot of things. With purpose, and in an effort to invent new and unique ways to help clients reach people.
For more on Breakfast and co-founders Andrew Zolty, Mattias Gunneras, and Michael Lipton, go here.
Steve Crandall and I took the train to Rochester last week. NBC was so excited by the idea of a physicist and an anthropologist investigating the universe by train, they optioned the concept without ado. They kept using phrases like "high concept" and "Lorre-esque" but I don’t think we said one funny thing the entire trip. I guess that’s what writers are for.
Steve and I were off to Rochester to join Pip Coburn and Dave Bujnowski for a brain storm. As Steve and I made our way from Penn Station northward, the topics of innovation and idea generation were very much on our minds. (Yes, and come to think of it, our preoccupation may also have had something to do with the fact that we were travelling on rolling stock that hasn’t been updated for several decades in an industry that continues to use the term "rolling stock.")
Steve had interesting things to say about the role of serendipity at Bell Labs, a place he worked for some 20 years. People applied themselves to Lab problems around the clock, but sometimes, and strangely, it was when they went to lunch that some of the best progress was made.
The creative world is familiar with this paradox. For some reason, it is when we are free to stop thinking about the problem that we sometimes manage our best work on the problem. And it is especially when we are free to think about something unrelated to our problem that our problem stops being a problem.
This is another way of saying that we are terrible at problem solving. We are those little wind up toys spinning our wheels and giving off that horrible, metallic, wind-down sound.
What does lunch do? It gives the world a chance to supply it’s "metaphoric materials." Cause that’s what’s happening, isn’t it? We are working on a problem to do with logistical systems and someone starts talking about the organization of ganglia in the brain and we go, "But of course. That will do, nicely. Thank you."
I blame the Dewey Decimal system. (And frankly it’s done so much harm in the world, I am pretty sure no one is going to mind me adding one more accusation.) The DDS clusters like minded things together. And that’s what we always do when trying to solve a problem. We cluster the data, theories, methods, colleagues we think we’ll need when in fact we should be invited serendipity into our lives to give us the chance for those metaphoric materials.
This leaves us with a problem. To harness the innovation paradox, we need ideas we can’t possibly guess we need. We must canvass concepts that are entirely unrelated to our present problem set. We need to find away to get away from the problem the hand and to give our deeper powers of pattern recognition a chance to work.
In sum, we have to go somewhere, and we have no clue where. We have to engage new ideas, but we have no clue which.
Every lunch table, especially when staffed with smart, interesting people, can serve to help us harness the Innovation paradox. But surely, we can do a little better than this. Surely, there is some way of narrowing the range of our stimuli in order to increase the chances of "contact."
Your thoughts, please.
Ad campaigns are like corporations. Nothing happens without a big bold idea. But there is no hope of success without an unblinking eye to execution.
The devil is in the details.
Which brings me to the campaign created by John Park and Steve Reepmeyer at Arnold Worldwide for Progressive. It stars Stephanie Courtney as Flo.
Spot 1: no more holding her purse!
Flo greets a husband and wife. Flo shows them their car insurance options and then says to the husband,
"And no more holding her purse!"
The wife replies,
"It’s a European shoulder bag."
The husband adds,
"It was a gift."
Fair enough. Funny enough. Job well done.
But what sells the spot, and the insurance is the details and the acting.
The wife delivers "It’s a European shoulder bag" just about perfectly. Flo has just put her foot in it. The wife is salvaging the situation by returning this reality to her concept of it. This is what we call "putting a good face on it." All better. Her husband is no longer a girl. Flo needn’t be embarrassed by her mistake. What sells this moment especially is the beauty of the wife’s voice and how flutingly she uses it. No other voice or tone would have managed social repair.
The husband does a nice social repair of his own. He lets us know that he is obliged to carry the purse. (It was a gift.) Even as he tells us, by rolling his eyes, what he thinks of having to carry it. (His wife is a kook.) Hey presto, he’s saved face for both Flo and his wife. Good girl. Boy! I mean, boy.
And now Flo (aka Stephanie Courtney) does that little "bobble head" thing people do when they have just stepped into someone else’s madness and now wish to withdraw from it without of course in any way repudiating the madness (and they really mean that). They smile stupidly to show that of course they accept the terms of these deranged people and wish merely to be allowed to leave quietly. (I think anthropologically we could go a step further. Flo’s bobble head performance has a social logic. It says, "You may have lost face, but look, I’m too dim to have noticed! You’re fine!")
Here is the bobble head gesture (eyes right). How long does it take to get these details right? How long to train the actors in the first place, to give them the ability to play social situations…as if they were unfolding spontaneously. How long to find the actors? How much direction and take after take is then called for? This is an aspect of the creative process of meaning making that will probably never makes its way into social media. This is part of the art of advertising that could now be in peril.
Spot 2: Calculator humor
Courtney has special dramatic powers. I was impressed with a second spot, the one that features the line "calculator humor" and has Flo saying "I’ll be here all week" and then "I will. Those are my hours." (I can’t find a version of this anywhere on line. Please let me know if you find it somewhere)
With the blessing of a VCR, I played this spot a couple of times, first at full speed, then in slow motion. Flo motion? It’s astounding to see how fast and how cleanly Courtney gets into and out of each of the bits in the bit. (Andy Grove has a piece in his Only the Paranoid Survive about watching an image in transition and not being able to spot the exact moment of transition. Courtney’s acting here has that quality.)
A case in point:
In the "calculator humor" spot, Flo moves from stage 1 ("I’m here all week") to stage 2 (sly glance at customer) to stage 3 ("No, really those are my hours.") in the blink of an eye but with perfect clarity. These are quite different dramatic moments but she executes each of them cleanly. There’s no blur or "trail."
Bad actors make one of two mistakes. In the first, they can’t accelerate into and out of moment with Courtney’s deftness. It takes them awhile to lumber into stage 2 and then awhile to lumber out again. We show this here (eyes right) with long tails. This error means that the creatives cannot "pack" the signal and the spot is rendered thin and less engaging. Worst case, the ad becomes an exercise in tedium. The worst offender on air at the moment is for 5 hour energy drink. You actually need the drink to survive the ad. (I’ll be here all week.)
The second mistake comes when an actor has the ability to accelerate but cannot get far enough into the bit. We, the audience, is left to wonder where he or she might have gone. What we get is a rough indication of the social moment the actor and the creative meant to deliver. And no more. The spot, the campaign, the brand are shortchanged.
This is meaning manufacture and meaning manufacture as the ad biz has always done it. It takes a fantastic attention to detail. It means that the creatives and the actors must have a deep knowledge of how social interaction works. And they must use this knowledge to craft 30 seconds that engages us. It’s easy, I think, to look at an actress like Courtney in a spot like this, and see it as broad and goofy comedy.
But as usual our culture has wheels with wheels and the people who would contribute to it must have gifts within gifts. Hats off to Courtney, Park, Reepmeyer, Arnold and Progressive for this splendid work.
References
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor.
The "and no more holding her purse!" Progressive ad on YouTube here.
The Wikipedia entry for Stephanie Courtney is here.
The Wikipedia entry for the Progressive campaign starring Flo is here.
Richard Saul Wurman and Gloria Nagy live in Newport. The NYC wrote them up yesterday and the results are interesting.
Wurman is the founder of TED and MED. Ms. Nagy, his wife, is a novelist. The kids are equally questing and accomplished. Tony Wurman is an artist who experiments in new media, Joshua is a severe-weather chaser, Reven is a photographer in New York, and Vanessa created a equestrian center in Rhode Island.
All of us in the creative class (as Richard Florida calls it) are interested in Richard Saul Wurman’s speciality: pattern recognition. Could there be secrets here?
And sure enough there are.
The article records Ms. Nagy’s answer to a snooty German architect when he asked, skeptically, about what her husband did for a living.
Ms. Nagy’s reply, she recalls, was something like:
“What Richard does is allow his brain to operate like a great big cellular Cuisinart, mixing all his knowledge, thoughts, frustrations, observations, visual, conceptual and gathered information and feelings about everything together, hitting the high switch and pouring it all out in the form of ideas baked in one mold or another: conference, book, map, exhibit.”
This is as good an account of pattern recognition as I have seen. It emphasizes how inclusive, syncretic, and fecund the process is. It begins with everything and ends up with one very particular thing. And this thing may become productive in its own right. Like TED which had been very productive of patterns indeed.
But why stop there?
The entire family is exemplary of what we now hope for from the creative class. Ms. Nagy is an ethnographer, of a kind, the observer of the architectures and fine details of contemporary life. Tony Wurman leaps media. Reven captures life. Joshua chases storms. (This last is increasingly apt for people who study contemporary culture.) Vanessa manages horses, and if you have ever worked with clients, you know who valuable this skill can be.
This family needs franchising. The Wurmans could be exactly what the corporation needs to make the world make sense. The CEO awakens to discover that her corporation has been disintermediated, disrupted, creatively destroyed as she slept. "Get me a Wurmans," she cries, "For God’s sake, get me a Wurmans."
References
Green, Penelope. 2010. “The Outsiders Inside Newport: Gloria Nagy and Richard Saul Wurman in Newport, R.I..” The New York Times, September 8. here. (Accessed September 10, 2010).
Post script
This article by Penelope Green does astonishing things for the NYT Home section. Have we ever seen a NYT story so rich in information about the personal lives of home occupants? With this as a lead, perhaps we will see the NYT take the Home section in new more ethnographic, anthropological directions. I am guessing, but only guessing, that the founder of this section, Joan Kron, would approve.
Virginia Postrel was kind enough to interview me for Enterpreneur Magazine.
You can find an edited version of the interview at Enterpreneur.com here.
For the full version of the interview in which you will find me chatty and discursive.
Virginia Postrel: What do you mean by “culture”?
Grant McCracken: I was just watching the movie I Love You, Man. It’s a funny movie, and it’s a wonderfully observed piece of anthropology. The Paul Rudd character doesn’t understand how to act like a “guy.” Somehow this knowledge has escaped him. That’s what culture is: the meanings and rules with which we understand and act in the world.
This makes culture sound amorphous and absurdly abstract, I know. But let’s put this another way. Culture is the very knowledge and scripts we will someday build into robots to make them socially sentient creatures. At the moment, we’re still teaching them to climb stairs. The more difficult task is to read social situations. Unless we’re autistic, most of us do this effortlessly and in real time. That’s because we have this knowledge “built in.” Notice what it will take to build it into robots. This is programming, exact, finite, and incredibly specific programming. Nothing amorphous or abstract about it.
VP: What’s the biggest mistake business people make when they think about the intersection of culture and commerce?
GM: Business people think that because they can’t see it, culture doesn’t exist. They suppose that the moment of sale consists of a rational decision, a calculation of interest, a pursuit of benefit. But every purchase is shaped by meanings and rules. Whether a new product finds a place in the market depends on whether and how it squares with the meanings in our heads. Think of all the innovations that were technically brilliant but failed because the consumer “couldn’t really get a handle on them.” This is another way of saying that the innovation was not designed or positioned in a way that made it consistent with the culture in our heads.
VP: What can a small startup without the resources to have a dedicated “chief culture officer” do to make sure it pays attention to the relevant cultural trends?
GM: Start ups have access to lots of culture knowledge. No need to hire a guru or a cool hunter. They can boot strap this knowledge. (They probably do need to read Chief Culture Officer. I can’t urge this strongly enough. But, hey, it’s my start up.) The thing is to formalize all that cultural knowledge we have in our heads. Right now it’s tacit knowledge. Like how to be a guy. Or things we know about culture, about television, cocktail culture, the local food movement, Burning Man. We have to get it out of our heads onto the table. And then we have to tag the changes we see happening. Then we need to build a big board in order to track the changes that matter to us and we have to start making estimates about when they will reach our markets. For the culture knowledge we don’t know, the trick is to start combing media more systematically. In Chief Culture Officer, I talk about an investment firm in NYC that keeps track of culture by having 5 people read 300 magazines. We don’t need to hire a cool hunter or a guru to learn about culture. We just have to pay attention.
GM: I think Alan Moore put his finger on the problem here in Crossing the Chasm. In the early days, tech start ups are selling to people who are savvy enough to figure out the value proposition and make the product work. Eventually, however, we are speaking to much larger audiences and this means talking to people who don’t get tech. Now we have to build not from what’s technically possible. Now we have to build to what fits in the world of the consumer. Consumers are no longer coming to us. We must go to them. We have to cease being an engineer for a moment and become an anthropologist. We must find out who the consumer is, how he lives, and what will make the product make sense to him. In a perfect world, we build a product that understands the consumer so perfectly, he or she doesn’t even need to read the manual. We all remember our first experience with the iPhone. It was as if the iPhone understood us so completely, it was teaching us how to use it. This is cultural knowledge in action.
VP: Could you give us an example of a startup that beat the big guys by understanding culture?
GM: The world of carbonated soft drinks is filled with examples of start ups that managed to spot the next trend and steal a march on the big guys: Snapple, Red Bull, Vitamin Water, Odwalla, and so on. These startups spotted the trend and rode it to glory. They get in early and ended up owning the market. In the book, I try to show how Snapple accomplished this miracle. The rewards here at breathtaking. Snapple sold to Quaker for $1.7 billion.
VP: People often say, “You can’t teach taste.” At least when it comes to business, you disagree. Why?
GM: Culture is a body of knowledge like any other body of knowledge. Saying we “can’t teach taste” is like saying we can’t teach finance, operations, or human relations. Of course, we can. But of course we have lots of people in business who have a vested interest in making it voodoo. This is the way gurus, cool hunters, and various agencies keep themselves in business. It’s time to get culture out of the black box. I don’t say we don’t need gurus or agencies. For certain purposes, they can create exceptional value. I do say that they should not be allowed to make themselves sole source for what we know about culture. In the run up of 1990s, serial startups found that the guy who was CFO for the last startup was now CMO for the next one. The C-Suite is filled with fast learners, with mobile learners. We need to get culture into this mix.
VP: A.G. Lafley is one of the heroes of Chief Culture Officer. What can entrepreneurs learn from him?
GM: He’s the guy who helped teach P&G, that great temple of marketing, that it had much more to learn about being consumer focused. In Game-Changers, Lafley insists that the marketer must dolly back from narrow utilities to see the larger social and cultural context, to see the consumer in all of his or her complexity. This is the corporation making sure that the product services is “not about us,” not about what the engineers can build, not about what the marketer’s can sell, not about what the corporation has traditionally done. It’s about who the consumer is and how he or she lives. It’s about that software in his or her heads.
VP: What’s wrong with “cool hunting”?
GM: Cool hunting is heat sensitive. Cool hunters only care about the latest stuff, the fads and fashion. But culture is vastly more than this. It is deep cultural traditions. These traditions change, but they do so slowly. And when they change, they do not show on the cool hunter’s radar. Hard to know how to quantify this, but my guess is that fads and fashions make up only 20% of culture. Slow culture is all the rest. What kind of professional ignores 80% of his or her domain?
VP: You’re a creative, divergent thinker, yet you seek to avoid what Claude Levi-Strauss called “wild thought.” How do you balance creativity and structure, and what would you advise entrepreneurs about striking that balance?
GM: I’m Canadian, a notoriously tidy people, the Swiss of North America. But I am prepared to go where ideas take me. I have this from my parents and from my education at the University of Chicago. (The latter looks a little like Lafley’s P&G. It accepts that the exercise is “not about us,” but about the ideas. You adapt as you must to honor them.) I think this makes me like most entrepreneurs who know that good things happen only when wild creativity is routinized and systematized. Entrepreneurs have range! They are there when the big ideas happen, driving people “outside the box.” They then find a way to rebuild the box. They then find a way to make something actually come out of the box. Then they find a way to put that something out in to the market where it turns into ROI. Phenomenal! They are very smart and very determined. But they are also masters of many cultures.
VP: You introduce the idea of the “lunch list” as a way to stay in touch with culture. What is it, and how would it apply to the owner of a small startup?
GM: No one can keep track of contemporary culture but there are people who really understand individual pieces of it. The CCO solution? Take these people to lunch. (Or otherwise engage them.) My editor at Basic Books, Tim Sullivan, is a great guy to take to lunch. He will give you the world of emerging ideas. He will let you his astounding powers of pattern recognition. Chefs, journalists, politicians, CMOs, diplomats, all can give us a glimpse of the forces shaping the world.
VP: You talk about “fast culture” and “slow culture.” What do you mean, and how do their implications for business differ?
GM: Fast culture is great churn of our culture at any given time. Some of the fads will cool into fashion, some of the fashions will cool into trends, and some of the trends will actually stay on to become culture. But most fad, fashion and trend just keeps going, out of our world, eventually out of memory. As I was saying above, it is fast culture that preoccupies us most.
But there is also “slow culture,” and these are the long standing traditions that are part of our bed rock. These get some attention from the academics. The historians have warmed to the idea of culture over the last 30 years especially and this has results in some very useful work. I am just reading a book called Hotel: An American History by Andrew K. Sandoval-Strausz, a wonderfully interesting look at the hospitality industry as it has shaped and been shaped by the American culture. We need to know about fast culture, but this is like taking a major leaguers’ stats for the season and not the career. We need to know about slow culture too.
VP: Why would Chris Rock make a good chief culture officer?
GM: Mr. Rock knows about African American culture and he knows about non African American culture, and knows how to pass back and forth between them. This makes him a cultural entrepreneur. We might say he’s in the shipping business. Anyone who knows two pieces of our culture is well on his or her way to mastering the larger whole. It’s a lot like language learning. The second language is always the toughest. The third and fourth come more easily.
VP: How can social media tools help small businesses keep in touch with culture?
VP: Does being Canadian give you an advantage as an anthropologist?
GM: An American journalist asked Martin Short why it was so many American comedians were Canadians by birth. Shore said, “Oh, that’s because you grew up watching TV. I grew up watching American TV.” My sister and I used to watch Saturday morning cartoons. We enjoyed them immensely, but there was always a small sense that we were watching something from another world. Now that we are a diverse society everyone has access to a difference of this kind. As a culture we are so decentered that everyone has an exceptional point of view.
VP: How much TV do you watch every week?
GM: I watch the national average, plus I have friends who are not as diligent as they should be, so I watch their hours too. As a civic gesture. TV is a wonderful listening device for our culture. The networks and cable run out a constant series of experiments (aka, new shows) and these shows are so expensive that choice are made with great care. Which is another way of saying the experiments are very carefully crafted. Then the TV view audience votes with their viewership and we see, hey presto, America likes Modern Marriage and it doesn’t like the show that comes after it on ABC, Cougar Town. It’s not impossible to draw cultural conclusions from this event.
VP: What do you make of Lady Gaga?
GM: Lady Gaga burns brightly at the moment. She has crafted herself in the tradition of David Bowie and Madonna, changing dramatically, vividly, and often.Indeed, Lady Gaga ups the transformational cycle. Bowie changed several times. Madonna changed many times. Lady Gaga appears to change with every performance. So we can take her as a measure of the speed at which we change. But she is also a fad struggling to stay on as a fashion and then a trend and then a fixture in our culture. Bowie and Madonna made the cut. Chances are she will not. But I hope I’m wrong. She is a vivid, interesting presence. (The real mystery here is why the music is so utterly ordinary. Bowie and Madona were transformational here too.)
VP: You ran a “CCO boot camp.” Who came and what did they do? Do you have plans for more?
GM: We had a great mix, people from the strategy world, the C-suite, entertainment industry, the military, designers, senior managers, grad students, a real range. In the morning, we reviewed 6 parts of American culture. In the afternoon, we looked at how to monitor and manage culture for the corporation. It was amazing fun. I am now planning to do one for a gigantic corporation. I now have a poll on my website to see where people want the next one held. At the moment, Boston is winning.
Books
Brooks, David. 2001. Bobos In Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There. Simon & Schuster.
Carey, John. 1992. The Intellectuals and the Masses: pride and prejudice among the literary intelligentsia, 1880-1939. London: Faber and Faber.
Docker, John. 1994. Postmodernism and popular culture: a cultural history. Cambridge. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fitzgerald, Frances. 1986. Cities on a Hill, A Journey Through Contemporary American Cultures. Simon and Schuster.
Florida, Richard. 2003. The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. Basic Books.
Fox, Kate. 2008. Watching the English: The Hidden Rules of English Behaviour. Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor.
Jenkins, Henry. 2008. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. Revised. NYU Press.
Johnson, Steven. 2005. Everything Bad is Good for You: How Today’s Popular Culture is Actually Making Us Smarter. Riverhead Books.
Kamp, David. 2006. The United States of Arugula: How We Became a Gourmet Nation. Broadway.
Katz, Donald R. 1993. Home Fires: An Intimate Portrait of One Middle-Class Family in Postwar America. Perennial.
Klein, Richard. 1993. Cigarettes Are Sublime. Duke University Press.
Lamont, Michele. 1992. Money, Morals and Manners: the culture of the French and the American upper-middle class. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Long, Elizabeth. 1985. The American Dream and the Popular Novel. Routledge Kegan & Paul.
Martin, Roger. 2007. The Opposable Mind. Boston: Harvard Business School Press
Postrel, Virginia. 1998. The Future and Its Enemies: The growing conflict over creativity, enterprise and progress. New York: The Free Press.
Shirky, Clay. 2009. Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations. Reprint. Penguin.
Thornton, Sarah. 1996. Club Cultures: Music, Media, and Subcultural Capital. Wesleyan.
Warner, W. Lloyd, J. O. Low, Paul S. Lunt, and Leo Srole. 1963. Yankee City. Yale University Press.
Waters, Mary C. 1990. Ethnic Options: Choosing Identities in America. University of California Press.
Weinberger, David. 2003. Small Pieces Loosely Joined: A Unified Theory of the Web. Basic Books.
Wolfe, Tom. 2001. A Man in Full. Dial Press Trade Paperback.
Zerubavel, Eviatar. 1993. The Fine Line. University Of Chicago Press.