When I think of Sears, I think of those Levi knockoffs my mom made me wear in middle school. I think of boring, not-so-flashy, moderately priced clothes and reliable tools and appliances. I don’t think zombie viral marketing.

Surely, when one of America’s stodgiest brands rolls out an undead advertising campaign, it’s a sign that the whole zombie phenomenon has jumped the shark.

The downside to this campaign is that it opens the door for some jokes at your brand’s expense (the undead aren’t known for their taste in clothes). The upside is that creating a zombie shopping section is a sure-fire viral hit. Or maybe not. Its “Fitness for zombies” YouTube video had a mere 84,00 views as of the morning, even though the campaign was launched days ago. It’s also interesting that while there is a Twitter link on the Sears zombie page (with a puny 700 followers), there is no Facebook tie-in. A search on Facebook for “Sears zombie” doesn’t turn up an official page, either.

So, give the Sears creative team credit for generating buzz but overall it’s a fail for some sloppy execution and miserable social media promotion.

Did anyone really think that Lebron James’ marketing appeal would suffer because of his controversial exit from Cleveland, which former NBA star turned analyst Charles Barkley called a punk move? Nah, Nike has too much invested in James to let that happen. James’ new Nike commercial, “Rise,” will air on TV today, though it was released on the web Monday and already had 214,000 views as of this morning. Nike says:

This isn’t about what LeBron James has done, or hasn’t done. This is about the difference between the expectations others may have of him versus the expectations he has of himself. What should he do? The answer is a question.

There’s even a funny jab at Barkley’s girth and his famous “I am not a role model” commercial from 1993, which ironically was  one of Nike’s first attempts at rehabilitating the image of one of its star pitchmen.

While James’ new ad is getting a nice reception, not everyone is a fan. Christopher John Farley in the WSJ’s Speakeasy blog says the piece would have never gotten Don Draper’s approval:

So now James has this Nike ad in which he keeps repeating “What should I do?” The line is a mocking one,  because he doesn’t really want an answer to the question. The question is meant to illustrate the ridiculousness of even asking it–James is saying that he should make his own life decisions.

Of course, he’s saying all this in a commercial in which, presumably, his every line was vetted  by Nike executives, Wieden + Kennedy and 55 other guys in suits.

Flickr photo by laverrue.

Take Thomas E. Weber’s little Facebook experiment for what it’s worth — some interesting insights into how FB decides what to put into your news feed. I wouldn’t go so far to say that Weber’s piece on The Daily Beast has “cracked” the code. Some of what he reports are things most habitual FB users already know — that the “most recent” part of your feed seems to be arbitrarily put together and that your visibility increases the more people comment on your posts.

The Daily Beast set out to crack the code of Facebook’s personalized news feed. Why do some friends seem to pop up constantly, while others are seldom seen? How much do the clicks of other friends in your network affect what you’re shown? Does Facebook reward some activities with undue exposure? And can you “stalk” your way into a friend’s news feed by obsessively viewing their page and photos?

To get the answers, we devised an experiment, creating our own virtual test lab within the confines of Facebook and tracking thousands of news-feed items over a period of several weeks. The focal point of our experiment: Phil Simonetti, a 60-year-old Facebook newcomer who allowed us to dictate and monitor his every move.

Besides the lack of earth-shattering revelations, there are few problems with Weber’s test. His sample size was fairly small and the “experiment” took place only over a few weeks. It also seems that he relied more on the collection of anecdotal evidence, rather than a data set that could be scientifically analyzed.

Still, it’s an interesting read, even if a little pointless considering that it seems Facebook changes its algorithm and interface depending on which way the wind is blowing.

For anyone who gets a little annoyed when the CNN anchors pimp their Twitter feeds, this video from the Dallas Fox affiliate is for you.

KDFW’s parody video does a good job of pointing out that TV news’ eagerness to be hip to social media can make it look just plain silly.

There’s an irony there. TV news was much quicker on the uptake than its newspaper counterparts when it came to making the transition into the Internet age. TV’s 24-hour news cycle, its willingness to innovate, the journalist cum celebrity and the superficiality of coverage, were made-to-order for the Web. Newspapers delivering yesterday’s news? Not so much.

But while TV news websites were much better early on than newspaper sites, they’re still a little clumsy at incorporating social media into their live broadcasts.

Social media is one thing that doesn’t translate well to live TV. If I’m watching the evening news on my television, I could care less what people on Twitter are saying about the day’s top story.

The lesson for broadcasters is simple: People don’t use their TV to interact to interact socially, and until that changes trying engage viewers through social media is going to be awkward, at best.