Identity/biometrics/technology marketing and writing services
Originally posted on my personal Instagram https://www.instagram.com/reel/DM3KMPvvsR4/
My personal Facebook account is technically a “professional” account, and therefore has Meta’s silly weekly contests. I have the content part down, but I’m NOT creating a Meta personal AI bot. (The Bredemarket Instagram account has two.)
My nomadic journey has ended.
The relative’s outpatient surgery was a success, and recovery is progressing.
Meanwhile, I met with one client and advanced several client product marketing projects, including a requirements document (done those for years), some product talking points (done those for years), a price/cost/supplier exercise (done those for years), and a project status report (done those for years).
I also published four Bredemarket posts (including this one) and the usual assortment of social media content on various channels (with the exception of one).
U.S. persons should pay special attention to my coverage of IDGA’s DoD/DHS border security report (blog, Substack, elsewhere).
I think I need a vacation.
(All pictures Imagen 4)
Tech marketers, do you have a “content gap” that you don’t even know about? (But your prospects know about it.)
When I approach a Bredemarket content prospect, I like to check the prospect’s current online content first.
You don’t need me to analyze the quantity and recency of your company’s online content. You can analyze it yourself.
And you SHOULD survey it.
Because whether you look at your content or avert your eyes, your prospects are looking at your content or lack thereof.
Do you dare take a look at yourself and answer the following questions?
Now I will be honest. While I am in some ways a content freak, even I fall behind at times.
Physician, heal thyself.
But what is the status of YOUR content? Quantity? Recency?
And what are you going to do about it?
Click here to bridge your content gap.
Or don’t.
The definitive summary on U.S. age assurance for adult content and social media as of today (June 27, 2025) has already been written at Biometric Update.
And I confess that if I were Joel R. McConvey, I would have unable to resist the overpowering temptation to dip my pen in the inkwell and write the following sentence:
“But as age checks become law in more and more places, the industry will have to weigh how far it can push – or pull out.”
But McConvey’s article does not just cover the Supreme Court’s decision on Texas HB 1181’s age verification requirement for porn websites—and Justice Clarence Thomas’ statement in the majority opinion that the act “triggers, and survives, review under intermediate scrutiny because it only incidentally burdens the protected speech of adults.”
The Biometric Update article also notes that a separate case regarding age assurance for social media use is still winding its way through the courts. The article quotes U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg’s ruling on Georgia SB 351:
“[T]he act curbs the speech rights of Georgia’s youth while imposing an immense, potentially intrusive burden on all Georgians who wish to engage in the most central computerized public fora of the twenty-first century. This cannot comport with the free flow of information the First Amendment protects.”
One important distinction: while opposition to pornography is primarily (albeit not exclusively) from the right of the U.S. political spectrum, opposition to social media is more broad-based. So social media restrictions are less of a party issue.
But returning to law rather than politics, one can objectively (or most likely subjectively) debate the Constitutional merits of naked people having sex vs. AI fakes of reunions of the living members of Led Zeppelin, the latter of which seem to be the trend on Facebook these days.
But streaking back to Texas, what of the minority opinion of the three Supreme Court Justices who dissented in the 6-3 opinion? According to The Texas Tribune, Justice Elena Kagan spoke for Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Kentanji Brown Jackson:
“But what if Texas could do better — what if Texas could achieve its interest without so interfering with adults’ constitutionally protected rights in viewing the speech HB 1181 covers? The State should be foreclosed from restricting adults’ access to protected speech if that is not in fact necessary.”
If you assume age verification (which uses a government backed ID) rather than age estimation (which does not), the question of whether identity verification (even without document retention) is “restricting” is a muddy one.
Of course all these issues have little to do with the technology itself, reminding us that technology is only a small part of any solution.
(Imagen 4)
If your strategy is solely based upon a single platform such as TikTok, CapCut, Substack, Canva, or any other, you’ve already lost by putting all your eggs in one social basket.
My Saturday TikTok post got me thinking about companies whose entire STRATEGY is based on TikTok.
Not tactics.
Strategy.
Or you can cite any other platform, dependence upon which could devastate your business overnight.
So own your own website and mailing list…right?
Well, at least Bredemarket doesn’t have to worry about losing access to my prospects and customers.
Even if I lose access to every single social media service, I still have my WordPress website and my MailChimp mailing list.
So I am 100% insulated, right?
Um, right?
OK, guess I’m threatened also.
In the biometric world, we talk about five factors of authentication and identity verification. If you depend upon a single factor, you’re in trouble. But using multiple factors lessens the risk.
Similarly, if you distribute your content via multiple channels, then a threat to any single channel doesn’t put you out of business.
(Sales pitch incoming)
And your distributed content can take multiple forms. Blogs. Case studies. White papers. Social content on multiple channels.
Assuming you actually create the content.
Or get someone to help you create it.
(Told you there would be a sales pitch.)
So rather than reading Bredemarket’s sales pitch (call to action), why don’t we work on creating yours? Click the image below and reserve a free meeting time.
Georgia Williams of Ray of Social fame dispensed some wisdom in a recent Instagram reel.
In her unemotional, understated way.
If you know Williams, you know that last sentence was a lie.
Her reel was entitled “How to Sound More Like You.”
At one point, Williams emphasized what you would NEVER say.
“I mean, would you say ‘streamline your strategy’ actually out loud to anyone? Nope!”
That sounded like a dare to me, so I commented that I was tempted to say just that…and more besides.
So I did.
To make a point.
Because while Ray of Social is expert in creating the graphics that businesses use to market themselves…
…Bredemarket is expert in working with identity/biometrics and technology firms to create the words that businesses use to market themselves.
Without sounding like a robot.
Talk to me about your content-proposal-analysis needs.
(Imagen 4)
Last Friday I shared my beef with the so-called LinkedIn “experts” and their championing of generic pablum.
“The ideal personal communication is this: ‘I am thrilled and excited to announce my CJIS certification!’”
This drivel is rooted in the idea that LinkedIn is a business network…and anything else is just “Facebook.”
Oddly enough, my Bredemarket consulting blog gets much more traffic from Facebook than it does from LinkedIn.
It appears that Facebook users are more willing to click on links (and leave the walled garden).
Perhaps that’s not “businesslike” on LinkedIn.
Therefore, despite my issues with the Metabot at times, I’m paying more attention to Facebook these days.
And if Facebook users pay more attention to Bredemarket than LinkedIn users…well, I won’t impede on the LinkedIn users as they perform thrilling and exciting things.
By the way, I probably won’t post an anti-LinkedIn “experts” diatribe on the Bredemarket blog next Friday…
(Imagen 4)
I spend a lot of time on LinkedIn and therefore endure the regular assault from the so-called LinkedIn “experts.”
You know them.
But that’s not the worst thing they say.
When they’re not commanding you to avoid the em dash, the LinkedIn “experts” remind us that LinkedIn is a professional network. And that our communications must be professional.
The ideal personal communication is this: “I am thrilled and excited to announce my CJIS certification!”
The ideal business communication is this:
Yes, the “experts” wish that businesses said nothing at all. But if they do say something, a statement like this optimizes outcomes: “WidgetCorp is dedicated to bettering the technology ecosystem.”
Such a statement is especially effective if all your competitors are saying the same thing. This unity of messaging positions you as an industry leader.
Which enables you to…argh, I can’t do this any more. I am hating myself more and more with each word I type. Can I throw up now? This is emotionally painful.
Derek Hughes just sent me an email that describes this generic pablum. It read, in part:
“Everything reads like it was written by a robot on decaf.
“Same recycled tips. Same recycled tone. Somehow, it’s all… grey.”
If your company wants conversions—and I assume that you do—avoid the generic pablum and say something.
This will bring your hungry people (target audience) to you.
And for the prospects that despise humanness and glory in generic pablum…if their focus is elsewhere, your focus won’t impede. Let them roam in the distance.
Remember my “In the Distance” Bredemarket blog post from Saturday?
I embedded a reel in that post with the following text:
If their focus is elsewhere
My focus won’t impede
Since I had created the reel anyway, I repurposed it by sharing it on Bredemarket’s social media channels.
Including YouTube. You can see the YouTube short here:
Now when I shared it on YouTube, I did so with no context whatsoever. The caption simply read “In the Distance.” Without the words I wrote in the original blog post (I’ll get to two particular words later).
Yet by Monday morning the short had over 1,000 views. For Bredemarket’s YouTube channel, that’s a lot. Only three shorts have attained higher views: two about Tropical Storm Hilary, and one about squirrels.
But why?
The relative popularity of this short on YouTube is a mystery. Other than its brevity, it includes none of the elements of a successful video:
I have a theory that probably isn’t correct, but I’m going to entertain it anyway.
If this didn’t immediately occur to you, the reel subconsciously incorporates emotion. Emotion at the loss of my “former friends” as mentioned in the blog (but not on YouTube). Yes, some of the same former friends who forgot my birthday long ago.
So my wild theory is that the sense of loss, resignation, and renewed determination (I won’t impede on them) permeated the reel and subconsciously increased interest.
Or maybe I’m wrong. Perhaps there are just more wombat fans than I realized.
Regardless of the unexpected popularity of this YouTube short, it illustrates why emotions are now the seventh of the seven questions that a content creator should ask you.
I (always) need to improve my INTENTIONAL injection of emotions into my content.
And yours.
I’m experimenting with more detailed prompts for generative AI.
If you haven’t noticed, I use a ton of AI-generated images in Bredemarket blog posts and social media posts. They primarily feature wildebeests, wombats, and iguanas, although sometimes they feature other things.
My prompts for these images are usually fairly short, no more than two sentences.
But when I saw some examples of prompts written by Danie Wylie—yes, the same Danie Wylie who wrote the Facebook post earlier this year at the https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid0nvmhyuLpn3jwMv8K8sbK5EXfS4kcpjfWHicgj4BJhdFLMme87P5fvPSYf9CwjRH7l&id=100001380243595&mibextid=wwXIfr URL—then I realized that I could include a lot more detail in my own image prompts.
If you read Wylie’s Facebook post, or my own subsequent post at the https://bredemarket.com/2025/06/03/when-hivellm-pitches-an-anti-fraud-professional/ URL, then you know exactly what the picture depicts.
Plus some other stuff buried in the details.
By the way, here is my prompt, which Google Gemini (Imagen 4) stored as “Eerie Scene: Sara’s Fake Bills.”
“Draw a realistic picture of a ghost-like woman wearing a t-shirt with the name “Sara.” She is holding out a large stack of dollar bills that is obviously fake because the picture on the bill is a picture of a clown with orange face makeup wearing a blue suit and a red tie. Next to Sara is a dead tree with a beehive hanging from it. Bees buzz around the beehive. A laptop with the word “HiveLLM” on the screen sits on the rocky ground beneath the tree. It is night time, and the full moon casts an eerie glow over the landscape.”
I didn’t get exactly what I wanted—the bills are two-faced—but close enough. And the accident of two-faced bills is a GOOD thing.
How detailed are your picture prompts?
Bredemarket