It's such an object lesson, and is probably taught in business schools the world over. What Apple lost by not licensing its operating system to multiple hardware developers was more than market share and millions of dollars. It was control of how we all work.

If you are reading this, I know you've seen it. Industry wonks, digerati gadflies, and ad geeks alike have had something to say about it. What the Subservient Chicken is, is an example of one more attempt-in a rising tide of attempts-at trying to force authentic engagement of a product or brand through an inauthentic, artificial construct. What I mean by this is that the Subservient Chicken is the latest attempt by marketers to impose virality on their marketing.

I like to get a little philosophical in regards to advertising from time-to-time. This week, I thought I would pose a creative question for all you media-minds. After all, to be a good media professional you must understand the creative or else you're missing half the strategy. This week's question is... Do you "Read" advertising or do you "Listen" to advertising?

If you're reading this, you're probably in the Internet marketing business, and thus you've received your 300th e-mail from a friend directing you to www.subservientchicken.com and prompting you to tell the chicken to do all sorts of crazy things.

I started my morning ritual by taking my computer out of sleep mode, signing on to AOL Instant Messenger, and opening a browser to check my email. My computer suddenly became clad with almost 20 unwanted pop-ups (some dirty), my homepage had changed, and someone hacked into my AIM account and spammed me. I mean, I write about this crap all the time. Who knew they'd get me? It's quite hard to think of anything positive in online advertising and digital media when you've been victimized, too.

Well, it still is really cool. And it's making some companies a ton of money while driving some of the best campaigns on the Web.

A few weeks ago I wrote in this space a column titled "Content Control and the Rise of the Insular Man." In that column, I argued that with the rising tide of media and the technology driving it, the individual's control over the choice he or she makes of what format and flavor of content to consume, might not be as "free" as media companies and the pundit class would have us believe.

Day in and day out we sit back and hypothesize about the effect of advertising on the general public. We develop concepts and ideas on how to best reach our target audience and convince them to act in a manner we so desire. One thing that each and every one of you should do is take a few moments every day and just "Be." Be the audience. Be the client. Be the consumer you are speaking to. Be the person who sees these ads and react as you would if you were them.

Americans are growing frustrated in trying to corroborate facts presented in news coverage with emerging new truths. Think for a second about how you, as a citizen who uses the Internet, gather information to answer questions like these. How does that compare to your news consumption habits of 10 or 15 years ago? If you're like me, you consult more sources of news and your newsgathering is more active than passive.

A while back, I wrote an about the diminishing audiences of young men toward TV viewing habits. Several young men wrote that programming wasn't what it used to be. Many complained that everything was either, "reality or gay." It made me think about content. As a real time medium, our industry is taxed with the daunting task of continuously coming up with new and fresh ideas. If content looks or sounds old, we are as good as dead.