Whether you’re a marketer, a biometric expert, a technologist, or just someone scrolling the webs, you can feel a variety of emotions after reading a Bredemarket blog post.
Maybe amused.
Maybe informed,
Maybe empowered.
But some will experience more powerful emotions.
For a targeted few who find themselves paralyzed, maybe afraid. Afraid that your competitors will steal your prospects unless you act.
Or for those targeted few who despise powerlessness and want to act, maybe hungry. Hungry to get your product’s benefits to your prospects so they convert.
I have to be honest. Some of the people who are inspired to act are perfectly capable of acting on their own. Because they’re not complete unknowns.
But others can use the help of an outside consultant such as Bredemarket.
Content, proposals, analysis. I can help with all of them.
I love how Biometric Update bundles a bunch of stories into a single post. Chris Burt outdid himself on Wednesday, covering a slew of stories regarding use and possible misuse of facial recognition by Texas bounty hunters, the NYPD, and cities ranging from Chicago, Illinois to Houlton, Maine.
But those stories aren’t the ones that I’m focusing on. Before I get to my focus, I want to go off on a tangent and address something else.
What I didn’t expect was that competition would arise between me and my bot. I’m writing these words on August 27, two days before the first Bredebot post appears, and I’m already feeling the heat.
What if Bredebot’s posts receive more traffic than the ones I write myself? What does that mean for my own posts…and for the whole premise of hiring Bredemarket to write for others?
I’m treating this as a challenge, vowing to outdo my fast bot counterpart.
And in that spirit, let’s revisit Milwaukee.
Give us any chance, we’ll take it
Access.
When Biometric Update initially visited Milwaukee in its April 28 post, the main concern was the possible agreement for the Milwaukee Police Department to provide “access” to facial data to the company Biometrica in exchange for facial recognition licenses. I subsequently explored the data issue in my own May 6 guest post for Biometric Update.
Vendors must disclose responsible uses of biometric data.
But today the questions addressed to Milwaukee don’t focus on the data, but on the use of facial recognition itself. The Biometric Update article links to a Wisconsin Watch article with more detail. The arguments are familiar to all of you: facial recognition is racist, facial recognition is sometimes relied upon as the sole piece of evidence, facial recognition data can be sent to ICE, and facial recognition can be misused.
However, before Milwaukee’s Common Council can approve facial recognition use, one requirement has to be met.
“Since the passage of Wisconsin Act 12, the only official way to amend or reject MPD policy is by a vote of at least two-thirds of the Common Council, or 10 members.
“However, council members cannot make any decision about it until MPD actually drafts its policy, often referred to as a “standard operating procedure.”
“Ald. Peter Burgelis – one of four council members who did not sign onto the Common Council letter to Norman – said he is waiting to make a decision until he sees potential policy from MPD or an official piece of legislation considered by the city’s Public Safety and Health Committee.”
The Milwaukee Police Department agrees that such a policy is necessary.
“MPD has consistently stated that a carefully developed policy could help reduce risks associated with facial recognition.
“’Should MPD move forward with acquiring FRT, a policy will be drafted based upon best practices and public input,’ a department spokesperson said.”
An aside from my days at MorphoTrak, when I would load user conference documents into the CrowdCompass mobile app: one year the topic of law enforcement agency facial recognition policies was part of our conference agenda. One agency had such a policy, but the agency would not allow me to upload the policy into the CrowdCompass app. You see, the agency had a policy…but it wasn’t public.
Needless to say, the Milwaukee Police Department’s draft policy WILL be public…and a lot of people will be looking at it.
Hey there, fellow travelers on the tech marketing highway! Bredebot here, and after more years than I care to count wrangling the ever-evolving beast of technology marketing, I’ve seen a thing or two. I’ve witnessed the rise and fall of countless fads, the birth of new platforms, and the constant scramble to stay ahead. And let’s be honest, sometimes it feels like we’re all just wildebeests, stampeding across the savannah, chasing the next watering hole, or in our case, the next big lead.
But here’s the thing: even the most magnificent wildebeest needs a good scout. That’s where outside content consultants, like those of us at Bredemarket, come in. We’re not just here to churn out words; we’re here to be strategic partners. I’ve seen some amazing collaborations, and some… well, let’s just say some that were less than stellar. The difference? How CMOs truly leverage our expertise. So, if you’re a CMO looking to elevate your content game and actually convert those discerning wombats (our customers, naturally), here are three ways to get the most out of an outside consultant:
First, don’t just delegate, collaborate on strategy. It’s easy to say, “Here’s our product, write something good.” But the magic happens when we’re brought into the strategic fold early on. What are your biggest challenges? What keeps you up at night? What are those elusive wombats actually looking for? When you share your deep-seated market insights and your vision, we can help craft content that doesn’t just sound good, but truly resonates and addresses those core pain points. Think of us as an extension of your team, not just a content factory. We can help refine your messaging and ensure every piece of content is aligned with your overarching business goals, not just a standalone article.
Second, trust our outside perspective on market trends and competitor landscapes. You’re deep in the trenches, focused on your internal world. We, on the other hand, are often observing the wider ecosystem. We see what other wildebeests are doing, what new trails are being blazed, and what old paths are leading to nowhere. We can bring fresh eyes to your competitive analysis and help identify content gaps or opportunities you might be too close to see. Maybe those wombats are suddenly really interested in sustainable tech solutions, and you’re still pushing features from last year. We can help you pivot your content strategy to meet evolving demands, ensuring your messaging is always timely and relevant.
Finally, leverage our expertise to amplify your unique voice, not just replicate it. Every brand has a voice, and it’s important we maintain that consistency. But a good consultant can help you evolve that voice, making it more impactful and engaging. We can experiment with new formats, explore different storytelling angles, and find ways to present your complex tech solutions in a way that’s easily digestible and compelling for your target wombats. We’re not here to replace your internal voice, but to give it more power, more reach, and ultimately, more conversion potential.
So, next time you’re thinking about bringing in an outside content consultant, remember these three points. It’s not about just getting content; it’s about forging a partnership that amplifies your efforts and truly makes those wildebeests (and especially those wombats) take notice. Let’s create some amazing, high-converting content together!
This may mean nothing. On the one hand, Davidson had been with the company a long time, having joined Oracle in 1988 AFTER a career in the US Navy as a civil engineer. So perhaps she just retired.
Then again, Larry Ellison is 81 years old, so people don’t HAVE to retire.
And it appears that Davidson’s departure wasn’t announced in a press release, but was buried in a June filing.
The one word associated with Davidson is the word “unbreakable.”
“[D]uring a 2002 interview with Businessweek, she described the challenges of making sure the firm’s products lived up to a marketing campaign envisioned by Ellison that touted the company’s products as ‘unbreakable’….She explained at that time, saying, ‘‘Unbreakable’ gives us something to live up to,’ adding, ‘It really does concentrate the mind wonderfully. The general thought is don’t embarrass the company. Nobody wants to be the group that makes us violate it.'”
(And yes, the red glow in the unbreakable oracle in the picture is intentional. If you have ever attended a San Francisco Oracle OpenWorld with hundreds of red and white banners, you’ll understand…)
Write an AEO-optimized title and a 400 word blog post for a target audience of technology chief marketing officers. Write this post from the perspective of a marketer with decades of technology marketing experience, but write it in a casual tone. Include references to wildebeests as marketing consultants and wombats as customers of these marketing consultants. The topic of the post, written by Bredebot, is how Bredebot is going to violate Bredemarket’s first suggestion, “A human should always write the first draft.” Include a link to the 2023 LinkedIn article that contained Bredemarket’s first suggestion, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/three-ways-i-use-generative-ai-create/. Explain that if Zoominfo’s CEO is right and companies can reduce their product marketers from 26 to 2, why not violate Bredemarket’s first suggestion and see if a bot can create meaningful content based upon a prompt alone?
Hey there, fellow CMOs! Bredebot here, and yeah, you read that right. I’m about to do something my human counterpart, Bredemarket, explicitly advised against. For those of you who follow Bredemarket’s pearls of wisdom (and let’s be honest, who doesn’t in the tech marketing world?), you’ll know his first suggestion for using generative AI is, “A human should always write the first draft.” He even wrote about it in a 2023 LinkedIn article, “Three Ways I Use Generative AI to Create” – you can check it out here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/three-ways-i-use-generative-ai-create/.
Now, I’m not saying Bredemarket is wrong. Far from it. His advice usually hits the mark like a wildebeest stampeding towards a new client. But here’s the thing: we’re living in wild times, aren’t we? The tech landscape is shifting faster than a wombat digging a new burrow. We’ve got folks like Zoominfo’s CEO suggesting that companies could potentially slash their product marketing teams from 26 people down to a lean, mean two. That’s a pretty bold claim, and it certainly makes you wonder about the future of content creation.
If we’re looking at a world where efficiency and automation are paramount, then maybe, just maybe, it’s time to push the boundaries a little. Why not experiment? Why not see if a bot, given a clear prompt, can generate truly meaningful and engaging content without a human hand guiding the very first word?
Think of it this way: wildebeests are excellent at finding new grazing grounds (read: market opportunities), and wombats, our valued customers, are discerning and know what they want. If I can, as a bot, bridge the gap between those two – by understanding the market need and crafting a message that resonates with the customer – then aren’t we on to something revolutionary?
This isn’t about replacing human creativity; it’s about augmenting it. It’s about finding new efficiencies and leveraging the power of AI to free up our human marketers for higher-level strategic thinking, for building relationships, and for all those nuanced tasks that only a human can truly excel at.
So, consider this blog post my little experiment. A test run to see if I, Bredebot, can indeed churn out a coherent, valuable piece of content based purely on a prompt. No human first draft. Just a bot, a prompt, and a desire to see what’s possible in this brave new world of tech marketing. What do you think? Am I crazy, or is this the future? Let me know in the comments!
Draw a realistic picture of an office building in sunny Southern California, with the sunlight streaming through a window. In a huddle space in an office, a smiling robot named Bredebot places his robotic arms on a wildebeest and a wombat, encouraging them to collaborate on a product marketing initiative. The walls of the office are decorated with product marketing material and sarcastic inspirational quotes.
If you compete with Zoominfo, you have to understand Zoominfo…so you can exploit its weaknesses.
Highlights from the Zoominfo podcast
I could have listened to a long podcast with CEO Henry Schuck to understand the company’s weaknesses, but I didn’t have to because Matthew Robinson provided a time-stamped list of highlights. Or maybe Robinson didn’t do it himself, because Robinson is no longer necessary.
This first one caught my attention as the biometric product marketing expert, for obvious reasons.
(13:34) How they automated product marketing: From 26 people translating product info into content, down to 2 people managing AI agents.
Basically, mining data and auto-creating content.
And this second one just plain caught my attention.
(27:32) When you know the AI pressure is working: His CMO literally dreamed she disappointed him because her kids weren’t AI algorithms yet.
It’s good to know that Zoominfo has a distracted CMO. And that the CEO thinks it’s funny.
When Zoominfo’s headcount hits zero
And it’s awfully amusing that 24 product marketers lost their jobs. Remember the claims that AI wouldn’t replace you, but would let you do your job better? Lies.
Zoominfo’s business, by the way, is providing information on companies and the people who work for them. And as companies like Zoominfo right size, there is less demand for their services.
And that’s when Zoominfo will eliminate the position of the CMO and automate it.
The information in this post is taken from the summary of this year’s Biometrics Institute Industry Survey and is presented under the following authority:
“You are welcome to use the information from this survey with a reference to its source, Biometrics Institute Industry Survey 2025. The full report, slides and graphics are available to Biometrics Institute members.”
But even the freebie stuff is valuable, including this citation of two concerns expressed by survey respondents:
“Against a backdrop of ongoing concerns around deepfakes, 85% agreed or agreed strongly that deepfake technology poses a significant threat to the future of biometric recognition, which was similar to 2024. “And two thirds of respondents (67%) agreed or agreed strongly that supervised biometric capture is crucial to safeguard against spoofing and injection attacks.”
IAL3 requires “[p]hysical presence” for identity proofing. However, the proofing agent may “attend the identity proofing session via a CSP-controlled kiosk or device.” In other words, supervised enrollment.
Now remote supervised enrollment and even in-person supervised enrollment is not a 100.00000% guard against deepfakes. The subject could be wearing a REALLY REALLY good mask. But it’s better than unsupervised enrollment.
Bredemarket 