Every minute I'm not on the Internet looking for new data, I'm falling further behind - or so it seems, and with every new site visited, I find content that it seems the masses have had access to for quite some time, information that I've been lacking and they had kept to themselves. Rather than do the same, I thought I'd display the most recent bookmarks I've taken down and will be following over the coming months, so that you too can be fulfilled.

AdWeek's AdFreak: AdWeek features a blog that summarizes interesting trends in the advertising world with quick two paragraph clips and summaries. Penned by multiple authors, each gets the chance to analyze branding highs and lows, new commercials and campaigns. Somehow, in two paragraphs, AdFreak captures the key elements and stays amusing at the same time.

TechCrunch: Quite possibly the top authority on Web 2.0, TechCrunch profiles and reviews new Web 2.0 products and companies. Many a service has debuted its wares through the site. TechCrunch has already introduced me to some interesting companies I may never have heard of without their quick hits.

GigaOm: Authored by Om Malik, a senior Business 2.0 reporter, GigaOm similarly tracks next generation technology, with a focus on networking and Internet trends and innovation. If you're even a bit curious about the world of VoIP, cable, and DSL, this is one to stow away.

Apple's big day came and went yesterday, and after all the hype and speculation, they introduced a few anticipated items - the iPod Hi-Fi, effectively an Apple-designed stereo that interoperates with iPod, a souped up Mac Mini with Intel at the core, and oddly enough, a $99 leather case for the iPod, with even fewer options than much cheaper alternatives from third party vendors. Across the blogosphere, and in the analyst and media community came a resounding, "that was it?"

It's amusing to see the transition of the Apple faithful's antics to the mainstream. For those who often frequent AppleInsider or Think Secret, hoping for the latest rumor morsels to spill out of Cupertino, what's actually presented never measures up to expectations, and Apple fans always leave wanting more, and begin speculation anew for new dates to match their hoped releases. It's always been this way, and anybody watching Apple knows that Apple's stock always goes down on the day of announcements - in a cycle best known as "buy on the rumor, sell on the news". Yesterday, of course, was no different.

Examining the iPod Hi-Fi as a potential consumer - and I have to take that role with every announcement, I'm not very impressed. The iPod Hi-Fi is a very clean stereo system for integrating with the iPod, but that's where it begins and ends. As mentioned earlier on this site, I picked up the iHome iH5 for Christmas this last year, and not only does it already do everything Apple's new iPod Hi-Fi does, but it also features an alarm clock and AM/FM radio. If I were really expected to get rid of my home stereo as Steve Jobs suggested yesterday, then where is my solution for listening to A's baseball games on AM radio? Is he anticipating that as I have all my music at my fingertips, I may never need AM/FM again? Is it expected that I will instead resort to streaming radio online - beamed to the iPod Hi-Fi through my Airport Express, or simultaneously run the iPod Hi-Fi with Apple's $49 FM tuner for the iPod? It's not going to happen. I'm not so silly as to demand a cassette deck or CD changer - for iPod covers that, but if I'm expected to toss out my 50-disc CD changer with Dual cassette, clock and AM/FM radio in exchange for the iPod Hi-Fi, there's a lot more left to include.

Can you name the five main Simpsons characters? (You knew it was Homer, Marge, Bart, Lisa and Maggie, right?) Well, the BBC thinks that you probably can't recite the five rights guaranteed you by the first amendment to the US Constitution quite so easily. In fact, if you could recite those five rights, you would be a small minority - numbering one in every thousand.

(And to be honest, I didn't get them all either. I said "right to bear arms" before my wife, a social studies teacher, shot me a withering look from across the room... Right... second amendment, I knew that.)

But civics lessons aside, I think knowledge of the Simpsons may actually have more applicability to today's modern life than does the Constitution's first amendment. We're said to have freedom of the press, but the press is almost exclusively owned by massive conglomerates, and our taxpayer dollars have been known to fund administration pay-outs for positive stories... and our freedom of assembly is threatened when we've learned that there are government employees infiltrating peaceful organizations under the guise of Homeland Security or the Patriot Act.

What the BBC missed is not that we can name the Simpsons' main characters - big deal. It is more impressive if you can remember who shot Mr. Burns (Maggie), who Bart sold his soul to (Milhouse) and for how much ($5.00). Now into the show's 17th season, it is increasingly difficult for even the most ardent Simpsons historians to remember the characters, their plot twists, punch lines, and many capers. Luckily for us, we can study up by using a myriad of online resources and fan sites - or even better, go to the source. With the first seven seasons of the Simpsons on DVD, you can watch every episode commercial-free, and gain insight through included commentary.

It's practically your civic duty.

It's one thing to have preferences, and quite another to show loyalty to a brand over all others - regardless of price, features (in most cases) or how long it takes to acquire the product. And at times, it's not clear where the said brand "earned" the customer loyalty - was it through a past positive experience, or through successful advertising and celebrity endorsement? How do we form brand loyalties, and stick to our guns when generic or alternative offerings may perform adequately?

I've often told my wife that "in our house, we don't purchase generics", or "we don't shop at CostCo". Sure, we probably would save a few bucks if I wasn't such an elitist twit, but given that's not going to change, it's interesting to see how we let brands express who we are. I have a favorite brand for almost everything - it's ridiculous. Some of the most obvious brand loyalties are very common. For jeans, I prefer Levis, and simply won't purchase any other brand. I prefer Diet Coke over Diet Pepsi... but somewhere along the way, I also decided that Cascade was my preferred dish detergent, Cheer is the laundry detergent, and when given my druthers, I'd bring home Coast bath soap. I don't get it. But if given a shopping list that said simply "laundry detergent, dish soap and bath soap", that's what I would come home with 9 out of 10 times, unless of course a competitor was offering a mean deal where I could buy one get one free... and to pick it up, I'd much rather go to Safeway than Albertson's.

In technology, Apple has been my brand for as long as I can seem to recall. It was a shock to me to enter college and realize that 9 out of 10 computers ran Windows, and not the other way around. This year, I became visibly upset when a co-worker of mine purchased some off-brand MP3 player, and not an iPod, which to me was a completely obvious choice. I even offered to help her trade it in... and she now knows better than to bring it up. When I was younger, I wouldn't purchase any running shoes unless they were from Nike, and to this day I don't like buying clothes from anywhere except Macy's - or Men's Wearhouse if I need to get dressed up. The worst thing you can do to my budget is leave me alone for 30 minutes in Macy's - because I'm sure I can find an Alfani brand something that I just don't happen to have that shade of already.

On the Web, brand is somewhat blurred. I don't visit MSNBC - period, because of that MS in the front. Microsoft may as well stand for Multiple Sclerosis for as much as I want to do with it. I don't visit MSN, and won't ever get a Hotmail account. I used to be the same way about Yahoo! - and for years avoided getting a Yahoo! account because it was 1) started by Stanford students, and 2) the generic link aggregation site that everybody and their dog had a logo for on their cheesy Web site. While I have preferred sites and plenty of bookmarks, articles are not more reputable because of their brand - they simply may be written more clearly or with an angle I like over another.

If I align myself with a brand that I take pride in, I want people to know that I've done so, as that brand represents a choice I've made. On my car, I have three logo stickers for the A's, Apple and TiVo. I will actively market those brands because I believe in what they do. I can talk to anybody who asks about those brands and what they stand for. But, somehow, I don't think you'll see logos for Cascade and Coast going up soon. That's probably another discussion for another post.