My wife and I met another couple at a diner for breakfast this morning.

I had eggs and Amy ordered the short stack of French toast.

When her order arrived, it was a single piece of French toast on a plate.

Merriam-Webster Online defines a stack as “a pile” or “a large quantity or number.”

By definition “one” of anything cannot be a pile or large quantity.

I know this seems like another one of my nitpiks.

But this is what happens when Americans do not learn to use the language properly.

In this situation, what would you do?

A–Send it back and ask for a regular stack.
B–Tell the diner owner of his error.
C–Laugh it off and eat the one piece of French toast.
D–Other.

An article in SIPA Hotline (10/16/09) suggests that a way to measure the effectiveness of social media is to track certain metrics before, during, and after the social media campaign.

The metrics to be measured can include:

>> Traffic to web site and blog.
>> Number of brand impressions per month.
>> Percentage of content clicked through.
>> Percantage increase in site-return visitors.
>> Percentage increase in followers or fans per month.

It also recommends monitoring what is said about your company on social networking sites using a new service called filtrbox (www.filtrbox.com) and responding to negative comments to correct perception.

Make sense?

According to a new Citibank survey, more than three out of four small business owners have not found social networking sites to be helpful in either generating new business leads or expanding their businesses during the last year.

An article in Marketing Charts, sent to me by online media expert Sarah Stambler, reports: “Despite widespread consumer use and increasing marketing efforts on social sites among larger organizations, managers in small businesses apparently are not jumping on the (social media) bandwagon.”

Since small businesses have much smaller marketing budgets than large organizations, and since social media is supposedly free, you would think small businesses would flock to social networking sites and embrace social media marketing.

The only reason why they might NOT do so is lack of ROI: even with its low cost, if social media doesn’t generate results, small businesses are not going to use it. They simply cannot afford to waste their time or money on marketing that does not generate positive ROI.

Large organizations can get excited about social media and write articles about its importance, because large corporations often spend millions on marketing programs, like branding campaigns, that generate no discernible ROI.

Make sense? Am I right, wrong, stupid, or crazy?

David Armano is a VP at Edelman Digital, and I never heard of him until today when I read his column in Advertising Age (9/21/09), p. 43.

But now, after reading his piece on “separating the social media snake oil from the vinegar,” I’m a fan.

His main message: Don’t think social media will save you, because it won’t.

“Anyone framing social media as the solution to the world’s problems is either drinking Kool-Aid or looking to make a buck,” writes Armano.

He acknowledges that social networking is causing a shift in the way we communicate. But, he warns, “don’t confuse shift with salvation.”

Here’s a no-brainer copywriting technique that works like gangbusters:

If you want someone to read and pay attention to your copy, put that copy in LARGE BOLDFACE TYPE.

When a law required NYC fast food restaurants to post the calorie content of meals on signs in larger type, the number of customers aware of the calories in burgers and other fast food went from 16% to 54%.

But big bold graphics apparently do not increase persuasion: despite the increased awareness, the calorie consumption of customers at these fast food joints slightly increased.

To improve persuasion in copy, you need to change the words, not just the size of the words.

If you want to save money when hiring ad agencies, use a small agency (50 or fewer employees) instead of a big agency (over 500 employees).

According to an article in Avertising Age (10/5/09, p. 26), chief creative directors at big agencies bill at $964 an hour — almost 4X more than the $271 an hour chief creative directors at small agencies bill on average.

Somehow, I don’t think that the creative director at the big agency is 4X more creative than her counterpart at the small ad agency.

And I seriously doubt the big agency’s campaigns generate 4X the sales of the small agency’s work…..

Here are my 10 favorite fiction books. I say ?fiction books? instead of novels so I can include book-length plays.

1??Death of a Salesman? by Arthur Miller.

2??A Prayer for Owen Meany? by John Irving.

3??A Brief History of the Dead? by Kevin Brockheimer.

4??The Time Traveler?s Wife? by Audrey Niffenegger.

5??Creatures of Light and Darkness? by Roger Zelazny.

6??The Stars My Destination? by Alfred Bester.

7??Inherit the Wind? by Jerome Lawrence and Robert Lee.

8??To Kill a Mockingbird? by Harper Lee

9??The Great Gatsby? by F. Scott Fitzgerald.

10??The Lovely Bones? by Alice Sebold.

Are any of these on your favorite books list?

Are there any of them you DON’T think are worthy?

What others are on your list that I don?t have?

Rep. Anna Eshoo (D., CA) seems to think so.

According to an article in Parade (9/27/09, p. 6), Eshoo recently introduced the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Migitation Act (CALM) — I kid you not.

If CALM passes, the FCC would be required to set new limits requiring lower volume on TV commercials.

Consumer advocates support CALM, arguing that “Advertisers simply do not have a right to scream at consumers in their living rooms,” says Joel Kelsey of Consumers Union.

Advertisers and the FCC point out that if consumers want less volume on TV commercials, they can simply use their remotes to turn down the sound.

Where do you stand on this fairly trivial but very controversial issue?

Should advertisers be forced by law to make TV commercials quieter?

Or can we leave it to consumers to combat loud TV commercials with the VOLUME control on their remotes?

What say you?