Targeting a specific group of audience for any kind of product is not new mantra. But when Seth Godin talks about it, he hits the nail right on the head so that everybody gets it. Here is an excerpt that exemplifies it:
The problem with "everyone" is that in order to reach everyone or teach everyone or sell to everyone, you need to so water down what you've got you end up with almost nothing.
Everyone doesn't go to the chiropractor, everyone doesn't give to charity, everyone has never been to Starbucks. Everyone, in fact, lives a decade behind the times and needs hundreds of impressions and lots of direct experience before they realize something is going on.
You don't want everyone. You want the right someone.
Someone who cares about what you do. Someone who will make a contribution that matters. Someone who will spread the word.
As soon as you start focusing on finding the right someone, things get better, fast. That's because you can ignore everyone and settle in and focus on the people you actually want.
When you are writing software, you always get a second chance. In fact, lots of chances to get it correct. You have compiler warnings, failed test cases and some times crashes alert you that something is not right and will give you a chance to correct. And you get literally unlimited chances to apply those corrections.
Well, cooking looks to be totally unforgiving in this respect and on any given day, you may get just one chance to get it right. If you fail, you fail. Try again right away if you have patience of starting it all over. Or start over some time later or next day. But not much of a second chance to correct a mistake.
More ruthless, when it comes to salt. If you put just a little more, even a tiny little more, it never hesitate to show what it got. Totally ruthless. End result will be a failed dish that no one will be able (and/or happy) to eat. And most dishes, you may not be able to add something little more to offset it.
I have recently spotted quite a few places where NDTV title doesn’t exactly say the same as the details in the article says. Lost in translation? or just plain twisting for journalistic sensationalism?Title says “'AAP doesn't treat women as humans,' says founder member Madhu Bhaduri as she quits”, but the quote in details says, slightly differently: “In this party, women are not considered humans” (see the text highlighted).Source : NDTV.comYou may say, they effectually mean the same thing. Is it? Even if they mean the same, Why not use the same exact phrase in both places?
This was the first time, I got confused and started questioning NDTV.com’s sensationalism agenda behind twisting titles of their news stories.This was on the day Delhi Assembly election results were announced. The NDTV.com story title said : “Assembly election 2013: have learnt from Aam Aadmi Party, says Rahul Gandhi”. However, content later in the article says it differently : "The Aam Aadmi Party involved a lot of non-traditional people and we will learn from that...and will better it in a way you cannot imagine," Mr Gandhi saidI have watched the video multiple times, just to make sure I wasn’t missing anything. Here is the actual choice of words Rahul Gandhi used. [04:07] “I think, I think the Aam Admi Party has involved a lot of people, who the traditional parties did not involve. We are going to learn from that and we are going to do a better job than anybody in the country and involve people in ways that you can not even imagine right now.” Source : NDTV.comThere is…