CaptainDarling Reply:
September 29th, 2009 at 4:40 pm

Oh please! I saw this in an airport and it definitely made me double-take (and buy a copy). The entire edition made me think about business in new ways. ShiFt does happen Joe. And Anthill should be applauded for baring its blunders.

[Reply]

Joe Reply:
September 30th, 2009 at 10:23 am

A blunder? Only for choosing to do this.

[Reply]

James Tuckerman Reply:
September 29th, 2009 at 5:48 pm

Exactamundo. That was indeed the goal.

It was designed to make new readers look twice – even if it made them feel temporarily uncomfortable.

But there’s a big difference between reading the word “shit” (and, then, having that ‘Ah-ha!’moment) and what happened to the poor 0.4% who never experienced the intended realisation.

The entire edition was about different ways of looking at things, by making the statement that things change (shift happens).

Now, I’m tempted to run back through our sales reports and see whether the title actually boosted sales. (I’ll let you know.)

[Reply]

James Tuckerman Reply:
September 30th, 2009 at 9:10 am

I don’t know what’s more mature… using a rude word to sell magazines or responding to a post with… like… ‘whatever’ (dude).

Much thought went into the cover and, as it turns out, the device did indeed boost retail sales by around 7 percent (that’s not an unsignificant sum in publishing).

You could say, we moved a shiftload of extra copies.

[Reply]

GMan Reply:
October 1st, 2009 at 12:03 am

R U JOKING? sorry
U R JOKING

[Reply]

James Tuckerman Reply:
September 30th, 2009 at 12:30 pm

Hi Joe,

Here are some articles where Anthill published the word ‘fuck’.

http://anthillonline.com/24-hour-podcast-people/
http://anthillonline.com/pete-thomond-disruptive-innovator/
http://anthillonline.com/the-invisible-networker/

I’m much happier to be living in a time where we can play with generally harmless words like these and censor far more destructive terms (i.e. 50 years ago, you couldn’t say ‘shit’ on radio but you could call someone a ‘nigger’ or one of many other hateful slurs).

I’m sure that there’s a debate in that definitely worth having.

[Reply]

Joe Reply:
September 30th, 2009 at 3:50 pm

Ok maybe my expectations were set too high.

[Reply]

James Tuckerman Reply:
September 30th, 2009 at 6:04 pm

It’s all about context.

But then again, if we tried to please everyone all the time…

James Tuckerman Reply:
October 1st, 2009 at 10:11 am

Hi GMan,

It’s pleasing that this discussion has evolved into one of ethics, standards and expectations (unexpected, but pleasing). Here’s my ‘manifesto’ of a response. After this, sorry guys, I must actually get back to the job of running a media company.

Firstly (and this is largely directed toward Joe):

Our job is NOT to cater to reader ‘expectations’ – even ‘high’ ones, whatever that means (morally high, grammatically high, intellectually high, sartorially high?). Our job is to CHALLENGE reader expectations.

If we weren’t doing that, you wouldn’t be reading this post.

The great thing about the internet is that it encourages transparency. It allows us to challenge ideas and prompt discussion. If everyone can be made ‘socially’ accountable for their actions (and thoughts), the world would be a better place. Ideas can be shared, challenged and new mores can be set.

Secondly (and this relates to the remark above about the ‘standard’ of debate):

If experience has taught me anything, it’s that people who demand debate about decency are usually the last to actually want it. (They already have their own views about what’s right, wrong, black or white. They are blind to grey). I was disappointed by Joe’s final dismissive mark when I posed a real scenario and topic: Is it a good thing to be living in a world where we can remove the taboo of otherwise meaningless words by simply using them?

It’s also always disappointing to me when readers engage in debate from behind alias and non de plumes. If you really believe in what you say and are not afraid to be challenged for your views, why not use your real name? (See my earlier point on transparency and ‘social’ accountability.)

That’s a far more pressing concern to me than whether we use curse words, that have entered the popular vocabulary. If humans were made accountable for what they say, simply through the process of having their real names visible, we would all see far more intelligent uses of all words (including the ones you don’t like).

Thirdly (to GMan):

Yes, I was aware of that. Last night, at the Swinburne MEI, the students took part in a corporate governance hypothetical (I was told). They were asked at the conclusion to write about ‘their feelings’ about the issues raised. This is a remarkable approach and very exciting. I’ve always taken the view that entrepreneurs are driven by the process of creation, NOT wealth creation. (If they get it right, wealth will follow).

I think that your comments above confuse our motivations for the cover or only focus on one of many reasons. There’s a distinction between wit, humour, shock and a range of tactics used to attract attention. Importantly, each is subjective and each are effective at driving people to pick up a magazine.

What were our motivations:(1) To get people buying it; (2) To challenge expectations; (3) To delve into the subject matter of the magazine. I don’t think there’s anything unethical or mysterious about any of those goals.

The latter point is the most important.

The topic was about how human behaviours are changing, how Gen Y and Gen X will soon dominate the labour force, how blue ocean strategies are likely to disrupt your way of thinking.

In short, how change is inevitable – shift happens. (So, be prepared to be shocked and to feel uncomfortable.)

From our perspective it was a clever way to do all three. And it definitely got chins wagging – two years on! (despite offending the colour blind… and Joe).

[Reply]

GMan Reply:
October 1st, 2009 at 10:52 pm

u say
Anthill is clearly a magazine that encourages higher thought than swearing for fun and shock factor.
We say – we are aware of that…
James …so why don’t you run the MBA SH1T (whoops SHIFT I mean) in your next Mag??
Graham Stewart Real Name.

[Reply]

James Tuckerman Reply:
October 2nd, 2009 at 10:15 am

Thanks Graham (especially for using your real name).

Every October edition since 2004, Anthill has run a big feature on and Business Plan Competitions. But now that we have radically reduced the print frequency, we won’t be putting together an October edition. Here’s why:

http://anthillonline.com/no-more-subscriptions/

Instead, we’re looking at putting something together on MBAs online. But at the moment it’s still an idea. To get your fix, here are some features we have run on MBAs in the past:

http://anthillonline.com/sharpening-entrepreneurial-minds/
http://anthillonline.com/higher-learning-for-higher-earning/
http://anthillonline.com/how-to-win-a-business-plan-competition/
http://anthillonline.com/top-marks-business-plan-competition/

Enjoy!

John Power Reply:
October 3rd, 2009 at 12:22 pm

Well JT, just when you probably thought this issue was done & dusted.

Check out this weekend’s (OCT 3-4) AFR pg 24, first paragraph…

So what, Anthill inspires the nation’s “leading” financial journo’s now? Who knows, possibly, but maybe not, merely vernacular, google returns >150K hits, this being one of the most original & best.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMcfrLYDm2U

Cheers

[Reply]