<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Marketing Begins At Home - Latest Comments in Can We Get More Annoying?</title><link>http://marketingbeginsathome.disqus.com/</link><description>Social Media and Public Relations Ideas and Insights From David Parmet</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:33:33 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Can We Get More Annoying?</title><link>http://www.parmet.net/pr/2008/10/23/can-we-get-more-annoying/#comment-4680581</link><description>First of all -- if taking a picture, uploading it to your website, writing about it and publishing it isn't "engagement" I'm not sure what is. ;-)&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But I get what you're saying.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Still, advertising will never truly change because the target (the human mind) is largely unchanged over the last, oh, several hundred years... or more.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Branding by association (or "interruption") is still a very valid way of increasing both awareness and perceived value of one's product. Doing so in a targeted sense where the context is relevant is a (much needed!) bonus.  Engagement then adds to this in a very big way, as is evidenced here.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Dave Hamilton</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 13:33:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Can We Get More Annoying?</title><link>http://www.parmet.net/pr/2008/10/23/can-we-get-more-annoying/#comment-4680582</link><description>interruption is still the default model because the type of person that would be eating at a mall food court and be surprised at the great ad opportunity on mall food court tables are not savvy enough to understand engagement.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Gregory Ng</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 11:18:37 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>