Stuck in the Middle

100bannertransIt might not mean much to people who don’t buy paint to create artwork, or ink to make prints, but Dan Smith’s company went ahead with a big decision this month. They stopped selling art supplies. That is, they stopped selling art supplies made by others, and decided to bet the farm on the paints, inks and other supplies that they make and sell under their own name.

Leisel Lund PrimTek Paintouts by LiesalPutting this another way, Daniel Smith Art Supply decided to leave the business of being a middleman. The company didn’t have much to say about the change, apart from the warehouse clearance notices that now arrive in my email box every day. On their website, one statement clearly expresses the company’s purpose: “Daniel Smith is a leading manufacturer of superior-quality lines of watercolor paints, sticks & grounds, acrylic paints & gesso, oil & water-soluble oil paints. Our products are available worldwide.” This is not a new idea: when Brooks Brothers has been selling its own clothing, in its own stores, Zachary Taylor was our 12th President.Brooks-Brothers-History-600x270

And that made me start wondering about Ken Burns, and a guy who worked for me twenty years ago who just showed up with his own documentary. If the connections are not immediately clear, please bear with me.

UnknownThis week, millions of Americans are spending their evenings with the Roosevelts. That is, they are watching a series of documentaries made by Ken Burns and his Florentine Films staff, a series that tells the story of Theodore, Franklin, Eleanor, their families, and their political careers. Burns is closely aligned with WETA, a public television station in Washington, DC, but neither Burns nor WETA is the distributor. Instead, that job first falls to PBS, and then, to nearly 200 local television stations. That’s the way it has worked since The Civil War, or, at least, since around 1990. I didn’t think much about that until someone I know ranted about missing the first half hour of one of the episodes. I figured the episode was available online, did a bit of exploring, and found that all of the episodes were available online, even before they were released on television. And that made me wonder about the chain of distribution. Quite reasonably, there is a website devoted entirely to The Roosevelts. The site’s logo is the show’s logo. The top menu items seem to be focused on the project, not on the distribution. Scroll down to the bottom and the site is copyrighted by WETA and Florentine Films. In fact, there is a modest PBS presence, and in fact, there is no real need for a middleman here at all. Ken Burns has made a fine series of films, and now, with the miracle of web distribution, he can distribute those films directly to his (admiring) public. Something feels right about PBS’s relationship with Ken Burns and his work, but look closely, and it’s clear that PBS, Burns, Florentine, WETA, and PBS’s member stations are taking this new digital distribution idea one step at a time.

And that made me think about the guy who used to work for me who produced an independent documentary. It’s a lovely documentary about the nasty behavior of a big company, and, of all things, a public passion for a particular soda pop. The produce and I were exploring how this documentary gain some exposure. In essence, the producer was seeking a middleman, a Netflix, an exhibitor to bring the film to the public. Old habits die hard. New thinking would probably involve, somehow, contacting every person passionate about the soft drink, and encouraging them to (a) watch the film, and (b) tell their friends. This is a new kind of magic, and it only works sometimes.

And that made me think about a friend who is wondering about the future of the music business. In times past, record labels signed and marketed artists. Now, artists communicate directly with fans, and many record labels are struggling to find their way. At the same time, authors are publishing their own books while dreaming of the money and marketing clout that a large publisher could provide (no more crates of books in the garage, no more handling every detail).

neon051-580x326UnknownSo here we are, caught between two ideas, two eras. In the former, large fortunes were made by the middleman. In the latter, there is no middleman. Make what you sell—the old American way (and, in fact, the way that many people in undeveloped nations continue to operate, with no clear path to a digital future). And then I think about Macy’s, Wal-Mart, and going back a bit, the much-criticized market domination of A&P and Rexall Drug. All of them hawking their self-branded merchandise, all of them making a fortune by selling other companies’ stuff.

Usually, I finish an article with a sense of direction. This time, it’s more complicated. Kudos to Dan Smith for doing something that makes sense instead of doing too many things that don’t. Kudos to the musicians and the authors and the documentary producers who have figured it out, and to Ken Burns and WETA for working within and beside and around the system as they invent a future that sustains everyone in their food chain. Let’s not pretend that this is easy, and let’s accept our era as the mass of contradictions that our world has become. In fact, some of our greatest internet success stories have been stories of middlemen with eBay and Amazon leading the way, and plenty of successful companies including Pinterest, Etsy, and Netflix populating a very long list of middleman enterprises.

At first, I thought I’d be writing an article entitled “Death of the Middleman,” but as I wrote, I realized that my initial approach was naive. Now, I suspect there will always be a role for the middleman. That’s the reason why the altogether excellent Brattleboro Food Co-op exists, to create a marketplace for local farmers and small time operators who make, but cannot directly market, their local cheeses (imagine visiting every creamery for every block of cheese, every week). And thank goodness for the local artisinal ice cream makers who have opened small shops nearby, more than compensating for the closing of the century-old country dairy that closed before its time (and sold only its own ice cream).

Has the digital revolution washed over the middleman? Nope. Not yet. He’s still traveling from town to town, still making the same sales calls he did a century or so ago. Looks a bit different now, made and lost a few fortunes along the way, but he’s still a part of the landscape, not about to give it up any time soon, near as I can see.



  1. I suspect that I’m the “ranter” about the media-channel availability of “The Roosevelts”, as I spoke to Howard on the topic.

    I think that the middleman, the branding and the between-two-eras discussion above is right on-the-money, and Howard’s mea culpa for it seeming disconnected is unnecessary. Though I make my living off of integrating IT products into a cohesive fabric that appears to be a single solution, things are no different in media, consumer products or most anything else.

    Though I rarely get to use my training/degree in Psychology directly, I use it every day to explain to myself and others a core concept that emerges from Psychology: that of “Gestalt”. While it is often twisted improperly, “Gestalt” is from the German word for “shape” or “form”. Translated indirectly, it means that the Whole that is perceived by a person or organization is different than the sum of the factors that make up that Whole — not “better” or “worse”, just different. We automatically take cues that we get and make judgements/opinions about how the larger context works.

    Enough on the background of Gestalt. Here’s why it matters: when we’re busy and have lots of decisions to make, we automatically measure our Gestalt about something/someone and create a set of expectations and assumptions about how the person or organization will react to out needs from the person or organization. Why did I not look into whether the episode of “The Roosevelts” was available on the Internet? Because my previous experiences with PBS broadcasts and the available cues during the broadcast didn’t seem to point to an integrated media channel approach. My perception is based on years of experiences that say “PBS will play the episodes over and over on broadcast TV until the audience falls off, and then place it into a difficult-to-find archive somewhere on the Net”. If they got it “right” this time (their practices met my expectations for a functional integrated approach), I’m likely to see that as an outlier to my Gestalt expectations for PBS. In turn, the people that spent the effort to “do it right” will be disappointed by the response to their improved integration — the ROI won’t be there, and the laggards amongst the providers will use it as ammunition for not repeating the improved behavior.

    When I spoke with Howard, he tried to explain to me that “PBS” wasn’t a single entity. Sorry, unless you’re an insider, it doesn’t match the consumer’s perception — “PBS” is viewed by the public as a content provider that has broadcast channel stations in many markets. They strove for decades to build that perception, and they have to live with both the positive and negative aspects of their marketing of themselves. It will take a fair portion of the time that it took me to build my perceptions to “unbuild” it. In the meantime, new (“improved”) behavior will be seen as “pleasant outliers” of expected (other-than-optimal) behavior.

    The same is true with the artist’s paint supplier. Their Gestalt of themselves is probably that they are better off treating the companies that they used to distribute products for as their competitors. Their goal is to sell their own products that almost certainly provide higher margin to them, instead of being a middleman for other peoples’ products. They will certainly see improved margins on what they now sell, but they will probably lose some of their customers whose Gestalt perceptions are that they expect a provider of a large selection of multivendor products.

    We live in an exciting time, but it is full of dissonance. The “ones that get it” are stressed by the laggards that want the dissonance to go away and return to the status quo. The public’s Gestalt and expectations won’t move quickly either – they are torn between a desire to move forward to the new world and the comfort of the world they already know. Nobody has quick and easy answers.

    But it is what it is, and dissonance is likely to reign for the foreseeable future…

Please Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: