As nearly as I can tell, nobody went as far as to engage the content linked to by my submissions.
To my mind, this begs the question: why are YCers not interested in learning (more) about marketing profitably through branded entertainment, given that it is a proven source of competitive advantage?
I think confirmation bias has to be considered as an explanation, but I don't pretend to know whether this hypothesis is valid...
9. Investors look for founders like the current stars.
...Historically investors thought it was important for a founder to be an expert in business...Now most VCs know they should be funding technical guys.
---
This is what I'm getting at. My research leads me to conclude that investors should seek out tech/marketing hybrids.
The $ being generated by diggnation is a good harbinger of the utility of the hybrid approach.
But pg tells us that, today, smart money "knows" Brin/Page-like teams are who to look for...
Now, is pg's assertion objectively true, or does it bespeak confirmation bias on the part of someone heavily invested in YC's investment thesis?
What about diggnation? Trump's yield from The Apprentice? Disney's yield from the Disney World program of the 1950's?
The ease of producing/distributing branded entertainment today? The utility of creating media that 1) increases awareness of the company, 2) showcases the company's customers, complementors, etc., and 3) generates profits?
As best I can recall, relevant (meta-analyses of) studies of entrepreneurship concluded that successful entrepreneurs are typically very mindful of risk. Amar Bhide's book The Origin and Evolution of New Businesses may be a good source for a survey of the aforesaid scholarship.
Well, as nearly as I can tell, many of the folks who frequent YC News are interested in understanding how to give rise to a successful startup, and two big pieces of that puzzle are marketing and generating profits...
My takeaway from the Wikipedia excerpt is that being afflicted w/ confirmation bias equates to being in denial. Healthy denial seems oxymoronic, as denial precludes risk management...
Also, you should lose the style of response you used above. Way too ad hominem, especially given that you spent exactly no time acquainting yourself w/ the content linked to by my submissions.
In January 2006, Drew Westen and a team from Emory University announced at the annual Society for Personality and Social Psychology conference in Palm Springs, California the results of a study[2] showing the brain activity for confirmation bias. Their results suggest the unconscious and emotion-driven nature of this form of bias.
The study was carried out during the pre-electoral period of the 2004 presidential election on 30 men, half who described themselves as strong Republicans and half as strong Democrats. During a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scan, the subjects were asked to assess contradictory statements by both George W. Bush and John Kerry. The scans showed that the part of the brain associated with reasoning, the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, was not involved when assessing the statements. Conversely, the most active regions of the brain were those involved in processing emotions (orbitofrontal cortex), conflict resolution (anterior cingulate cortex) and making judgment about moral accountability (posterior cingulate cortex).[3]
Dr. Westen summarised the work:
"None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged. Essentially, it appears as if partisans twirl the cognitive kaleidoscope until they get the conclusions they want, and then they get massively reinforced for it, with the elimination of negative emotional states and activation of positive ones....
Everyone from executives and judges to scientists and politicians may reason to emotionally biased judgments when they have a vested interest in how to interpret 'the facts'."[4]
---end of wikipedia excerpt---
As nearly as I can tell, this kind of bias afflicts most/all of the folks who frequent YC News. To understand why I think this, review my previous submissions and the non-response each received. It seems that (aspiring) entrepreneurs who are pure tech (I'm a hybrid of comp sci & comedy writing) just don't want to believe that, going forward, their companies will probably have to market profitably through branded entertainment to be competitive.
In January 2006, Drew Westen and a team from Emory University announced at the annual Society for Personality and Social Psychology conference in Palm Springs, California the results of a study[2] showing the brain activity for confirmation bias. Their results suggest the unconscious and emotion-driven nature of this form of bias.
The study was carried out during the pre-electoral period of the 2004 presidential election on 30 men, half who described themselves as strong Republicans and half as strong Democrats. During a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scan, the subjects were asked to assess contradictory statements by both George W. Bush and John Kerry. The scans showed that the part of the brain associated with reasoning, the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, was not involved when assessing the statements. Conversely, the most active regions of the brain were those involved in processing emotions (orbitofrontal cortex), conflict resolution (anterior cingulate cortex) and making judgment about moral accountability (posterior cingulate cortex).[3]
Dr. Westen summarised the work:
"None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged. Essentially, it appears as if partisans twirl the cognitive kaleidoscope until they get the conclusions they want, and then they get massively reinforced for it, with the elimination of negative emotional states and activation of positive ones....
Everyone from executives and judges to scientists and politicians may reason to emotionally biased judgments when they have a vested interest in how to interpret 'the facts'."[4]
---end of wikipedia excerpt---
As nearly as I can tell, this kind of bias afflicts most/all of the folks who frequent YC News. To understand why I think this, review my previous submissions and the non-response each received. It seems that (aspiring) entrepreneurs who are pure tech (I'm a hybrid of comp sci & comedy writing) just don't want to believe that, going forward, their companies will probably have to market profitably to be competitive.
The takeaway point: marketing plans soon may have to describe how a startup will run marketing as a profit center. So when you're done (re-)reading On Lisp, you'll probably want to crack Robert McKee's Story, as it is the bible for screenwriting (e.g., sitcom design) :-)
develop an online sitcom set at my company that will 1) popularize my company's online markets, 2) showcase market participants, and 3) earn profits from sales of ad space (in the tradition of diggnation, NBC's The Apprentice, etc.)
Enter my "open source" biz plan for leveraging media -- and situation comedy in particular -- to establish the most popular online market for customized education.
See OpportuniTV.com for details. Two (de facto) reviews of earlier versions of the site's content:
"I just spent about an hour surfing around with a bit of amazement."
Josh Peterson
Co-Founder/CEO
43Things.com (an Amazon.com company)
December 12, 2004
"Frank, you are a good man. Have you thought about joining this team? Your only alternative, of course, is venture capital. But their usual models require getting rid of the 'originator' within the first eighteen months. With Netscape it took a little longer, but you get the idea."
Randy Hinrichs
Manager, Learning Sciences and Technology Group
Microsoft Research
December 1998