While I try to avoid self-righteous '90s alt-bros as a general rule, I've got to agree with Trent Reznor here: music is now essentially free, whether we like it or not. But then, this is true of information as a whole (just ask Chris Anderson). If it's digital, it will eventually be available to everyone for nothing. Blame the internet — it's turned us all into mini multimedia moguls.

That's why smart bands don't just write songs and make videos anymore. Instead, they use social media to build collaborative experiences on open APIs. Innovative artists empower their audiences, encouraging them to explore and examine the music until its secrets are revealed, then create and syndicate their own interpretations. The cream rises to the top, bands expand their reach and fans extend the brand by becoming part of it. 

It works. To promote the song You Came Out, for example, We Have Band shot a stop-motion video. Then they shared the building blocks (all 4815 of them), showed us how they were put together, bundled everything into a single package and spread the word tweet by tweet. Remixes, notoriety and new fans followed, and all it took was a solid creative concept, a good social ecosystem and a little guidance from W+K London (the kind of stuff we do for Dell Lounge every day). 

Smart companies could learn a thing or two from music scene pioneers. Like a great band, a strong brand inspires fans to participate so it can reach new heights. Just listen for the cues and join in. 

Let me just start by saying I admire Dustin Curtis's courage. Anyone willing to speak truth to power about a massive fail like AA.com is aces in my book.

But the medium is the message online, and imho there's just one problem with an otherwise spot-on critique. With all due respect, the choice of color (#cccccc) for inline links baffles me. Good user experience relies on an intuitive user interface. When you have to squint to read a hyperlink, UX suffers a little as a result.

Full disclosure: I don't specialize in UI or UX. But I do make the interactive content. And I value the opinions of my peers. Dustin, if you're reading this, I hope you feel the same way. Also, thanks for doing what you did. I hope your effort wins you a well-deserved new client.

About two years ago, certain people began throwing number signs in front of certain words in their tweets. The uninitiated were more than a little put off by the use of these seemingly meaningless symbols, but for some reason the twitterati were drawn like moths to a flame. And once the rest of the twit-o-sphere wrapped its mind around how hashtags work, they quickly became the preferred way to find, create and promote trending topics on Twitter.

These days, hashtags are everywhere — Facebook statuses, NPR…you name it. Some are meant for a select few (recently spotted: #whydovectorshapesremainclickablewithdirectselect). Others are clearly designed to grab everyone's attention. While organizations like #hashtags figure out cool ways to show the effects of this powerful little symbol, marketers keep trying (and, judging from efforts like MTV’s #thephone campaign, failing) to capitalize on it. Don’t even get me started on the MLM issue. 

All of this begs the question: how relevant are hashtags these days? Twitter Search now does much of the work hashtags used to do, and misguided (or malignant) efforts to use them just make people look the other way. While I’m a fan of hashtags in theory, in practice I find myself using them less and less every day.

I’d love to hear your take on the state of hashtags. Are they relevant? Annoying? Marketable? Endangered? Leave a comment and share your thoughts.