While talking to Grant Petersen from Rivendell, he mentioned his love of decades old Chouinard climbing catalogs.

I grew up reading catalogs. The Herter’s catalogue* was the most opinionated one out there, but it was also the most entertaining. Sometimes I’ll read an online comment that, “Rivendell (or Grant) is so opinionated” and it’s supposed to be a criticism. It’s not a criticism. If you want to criticize me, there are way better ways to do it. Tell me I don’t have my facts right, or I don’t give credit where it is due, or my grammar is bad, or my jokes are stupid. That will do the job of hurting my feelings, but being accused of being opinionated is a compliment.

The best catalogues ever were the 1972 and 1973 Chouinard Equipment/Great Pacific Iron Works climbing catalogs. There will never be catalogues like those again. Everybody who writes copy or catalogs or online stuff or reads at all should read those.

Strong praise. Turns out the 1972 Chouinard Catalog is online. Copies of the original catalog fetch $200+ on eBay. But to understand its impact, you first need to know the context around it.

The Chouinard backstory
The backstory to the company is a “scratch your own itch” tale. It starts with pitons, the metal spikes climbers drive into cracks. They used to be made of soft iron. Climbers placed them once and left them in the rock.

But in 1957, a young climber named Yvon Chouinard decided to make his own reusable hardware. He went to a junkyard and bought a used coal-fired forge, a 138-pound anvil, some tongs and hammers, and started teaching himself how to blacksmith. He made his first chrome-molybdenum steel pitons and word spread. Soon, he was in business and selling them for $1.50 each to other climbers. By 1970, Chouinard Equipment had become the largest supplier of climbing hardware in the U.S.

But there was a problem. The company’s gear was damaging the rock. The same routes were being used over and over and the same fragile cracks had to endure repeated hammering of pitons. The disfiguring was severe. So Chouinard and his business partner Tom Frost decided to phase out of the piton business, despite the fact that it comprised 70% of the company’s business. Chouinard introduced an alternative: aluminum chocks that could be wedged by hand rather than hammered in and out of cracks. They were introduced in that 1972 catalog, the company’s first. The bold move worked. Within a few months, the piton business atrophied and chocks sold faster than they could be made.

Looking at the catalog
So what kind of catalog do you put out when you’re reversing your entire business? Chouinard went with a mix of product descriptions, climbing advice, inspirational quotes, and essays that served as a “clean climbing” manifesto. It opens with a statement on the deterioration of both the physical aspect of the mountains and the moral integrity of climbers.

No longer can we assume the earth’s resources are limitless; that there are ranges of unclimbed peaks extending endlessly beyond the horizon. Mountains are finite, and despite their massive appearance, they are fragile…

We believe the only way to ensure the climbing experience for ourselves and future generations is to preserve (1) the vertical wilderness, and (2) the adventure inherent in the experience. Really, the only insurance to guarantee this adventure and the safest insurance to maintain it is exercise of moral restraint and individual responsibility.

Thus, it is the style of the climb, not attainment of the summit, which is the measure of personal success. Traditionally stated, each of us must consider whether the end is more important than the means. Given the vital importance of style we suggest that the keynote is simplicity. The fewer gadgets between the climber and the climb, the greater is the chance to attain the desired communication with oneself—and nature.

The equipment offered in this catalog attempts to support this ethic.

A guide for clean climbers.

A few pages later, there is a guide for clean climbers.

There is a word for it, and the word is clean. Climbing with only nuts and runners for protection is clean climbing. Clean because the rock is left unaltered by the passing climber. Clean because nothing is hammered into the rock and then hammered back out, leaving the rock scarred and next climber’s experience less natural. Clean is climbing the rock without changing it; a step closer to organic climbing for the natural man.

Think Tank makes great photography bags. Like all manufacturers they stand by the quality of their product. However, they believe the “Lifetime warranty” is nothing more than marketing BS.

Here’s a great statement from their No Rhetoric Warranty page:

If you’re 30 years old when you purchased a bag, are you really going to return it 30 years later for repair? The only way this is possible is if the bag has stayed in your closet the majority of the time. Remember the leather cases in the 1960’s? Is anyone returning these bags for repair under the “lifetime” warranty? This is why the lifetime warranty is more of a marketing gimmick than the truth. Is it the life of the bag, or your personal life? The normal life of a bag, if it is used weekly, is four to 10 years, which is not “lifetime.” If lifetime means your personal life, when you’re dead, you won’t need the bag, unless it’s a body bag.

I found this statement refreshing. I’m not sure how big Think Tank is — how many employees or revenues. This straight-talk made them feel like a shop around the corner, and I like that.

It’s been almost a year since we published REWORK, a book that violated a lot of the publishing industry’s conventional wisdom…

Conventional wisdom: Books targeted at entrepreneurs generally don’t sell very well or usually end up on the bottom shelf.
REWORK: Written specifically for starters and small business people.

CW: For the price point of our book, it must be at least 40,000 words. Readers want something bulky that’s got lots of content.
REWORK: We chopped the final edition down to 27,000 words (from 50,000+). You can get through it in just a few hours.

CW: Business books don’t have illustrations.
REWORK: Each essay accompanied by Mike Rohde’s artwork. (Mike explained the process in these posts: part 1, part 2.)

CW: The copyright page goes at the beginning.
REWORK: The copyright page is at the end. And there’s no foreword either. That lets readers get right to the meat of the book.

CW: The back cover should be filled with a lengthy explanation and blurbs.
REWORK: The back cover is as pretty as the front cover. A few key points and that’s it.

CW: The format should be long chapters.
REWORK: Filled with short essays, most just a page or two.

CW: A business book should use business-y language.
REWORK: Plain language throughout (and even some cursing).

CW: Books don’t have commercials.
REWORK: Coudal helped us created great trailers and even a Karl Rove “attack” video that helped get the word out about the book.

Things turned out alright. Last night, 800 CEO READ named REWORK business book of the year. 800 CEO READ said, “If you are an aspiring business book author or publisher and want to know what a truly exceptional business book looks like, REWORK is the example…[It’s] the best-conceived and designed book of the year.”

REWORK has now sold over 110,000 copies in the US and remains on the New York Times’ Hardcover Business Best Sellers list. It’s also been translated around the world. And best of all, every day we get letters from readers who tell us they’ve been inspired by the book. Thanks to everyone who purchased the book and has taken the time to write us. And thanks to 800 CEO READ for the award. Also, we have to give credit to our team at Crown for giving us the slack to run with these ideas.

We hope REWORK’s success shows that 1) business books don’t have to be like business books and 2) you can fight back against the “it’s the way we’ve always done it” mentality that homogenizes so many books (and plenty of other stuff too).

We take great care in pairing the right words with the right images here at 37signals. Jason Fried writes and rewrites headlines and body copy over and over again to ensure that we’re communicating the right message.

I have a theory about online advertising. I’m not sure if I’m on to something, but I wanted to share it with you to hear what you think. Here goes:

The Subliminal Negativity Theory

News is depressing. There are crises, wars, bailouts, failures. These news sources need advertising to keep reporting the news. It has been that way for ages. The revolution of advertising online (as demonstrated by Google) has been to serve relevant and contextual ads. These ads are related to the content we’re interested in.

However, many of the ads on news sites are displayed inline with negative and scary headlines. Do people viewing these ads pick-up on the negative mojo? Do the advertisers get some negativity rubbed off on them? Like I said, at 37signals we take great care in pairing words and images on the screen. We would never want to associate our products with negative words.

My theory is that the advertisers on these news sites do pick up on some of the negativity in the headlines. There’s got to be some subliminal association at work. Here are some screens from various news sites around the web.

The New York Times

The Wall Street Journal

CNN

BBC

Fox News

So what do you think? I’d love to hear thoughts or contrary theories in the comments.

When you think of great writing lessons, you usually don’t think of late-night TV hosts. But Conan O’Brien’s “People of Earth” letter was a pitch-perfect response to a crisis situation. It became big news and set the tone for everything that happened afterwards in the NBC/Conan/Leno debacle. And it offers lessons for anyone who needs to put a public face on a shitty situation.

A closer look
The note starts off light by addressing readers as the “People of Earth.” Then he declares himself lucky.

I want to start by making it clear that no one should waste a second feeling sorry for me. For 17 years, I’ve been getting paid to do what I love most and, in a world with real problems, I’ve been absurdly lucky.

“Don’t feel sorry for me” is a great way to endear yourself to people in a time of trouble. Though this is obviously nowhere near a life-and-death situation, the approach here is vaguely reminiscent of Lou Gehrig telling a stadium of fans that, despite his illness, he considers himself “the luckiest man on the face of this earth.”

Conan then lays out an argument that is based on the legacy of the Tonight Show as opposed to himself.

I sincerely believe that delaying the Tonight Show into the next day to accommodate another comedy program will seriously damage what I consider to be the greatest franchise in the history of broadcasting. The Tonight Show at 12:05 simply isn’t the Tonight Show…My staff and I have worked unbelievably hard and we are very proud of our contribution to the legacy of The Tonight Show. But I cannot participate in what I honestly believe is its destruction.

Now it’s about history, tradition, and Johnny instead of just some celeb moaning about being wronged.

He closes by admitting that he has no idea where things will go from here.

There has been speculation about my going to another network but, to set the record straight, I currently have no other offer and honestly have no idea what happens next.

Instead of playing hardball, he plays heartfelt. And the honesty worked. People rallied to his side and Team Coco was born.

The backstory
Now the behind-the-scenes story of how this letter came to be is coming to light. According to “The Unsocial Network,” which looks at the Conan/Leno showdown, it started when Conan’s team first learned what NBC was up to. They reached out to “the best, toughest” litigator they knew, Patty Glaser, and she got together with Conan and his team.

During Q&A at a conference I spoke at a few years back, someone asked me “What’s your take on the true value of a university education?” I shared my general opinion (summary: great socially, but not realistic enough academically) and ended with a description of a course I’d like to see taught in college. In fact, I’d like to teach it.

It would be a writing course. Every assignment would be delivered in five versions: A three page version, a one page version, a three paragraph version, a one paragraph version, and a one sentence version.

I don’t care about the topic. I care about the editing. I care about the constant refinement and compression. I care about taking three pages and turning it one page. Then from one page into three paragraphs. Then from three paragraphs into one paragraph. And finally, from one paragraph into one perfectly distilled sentence.

Along the way you’d trade detail for brevity. Hopefully adding clarity at each point. This is important because I believe editing is an essential skill that is often overlooked and under appreciated. The future belongs to the best editors.

Each step requires asking “What’s really important?” That’s the most important question you can ask yourself about anything. The class would really be about answering that very question at each step of the way. Whittling it all down until all that’s left is the point.

I hope to be able to teach this class one day.

Google likes to characterize Android as “open” and iOS/iPhone as “closed.” That puts Apple in a tough spot. Arguing for a closed system when the competition is offering an open one makes you seem like the bad guy.

But change the words being used and it becomes an entirely different debate. Closed vs. open is one thing, fragmented vs. integrated is something else. Look at how Steve Jobs reframes the issue during this conference call with analysts:

We think the open versus closed argument is just a smokescreen to try and hide the real issue, which is, “What’s best for the customer – fragmented versus integrated?” We think Android is very, very fragmented, and becoming more fragmented by the day. And as you know, Apple strives for the integrated model so that the user isn’t forced to be the systems integrator. We see tremendous value at having Apple, rather than our users, be the systems integrator. We think this a huge strength of our approach compared to Google’s: when selling the users who want their devices to just work, we believe that integrated will trump fragmented every time.

...So we are very committed to the integrated approach, no matter how many times Google tries to characterize it as “closed.” And we are confident that it will triumph over Google’s fragmented approach, no matter how many times Google tries to characterize it as “open.”

Reframing in politics
Reminds me of how politicians use words to reframe issues. Consultant Frank Luntz advises Republicans to use phrases like “death tax” instead of “estate tax.”

Look, for years, political people and lawyers — who, by the way, are the worst communicators — used the phrase “estate tax.” And for years they couldn’t eliminate it. The public wouldn’t support it because the word “estate” sounds wealthy. Someone like me comes around and realizes that it’s not an estate tax, it’s a death tax, because you’re taxed at death. And suddenly something that isn’t viable achieves the support of 75 percent of the American people. It’s the same tax, but nobody really knows what an estate is. But they certainly know what it means to be taxed when you die.

Meanwhile, George Lakoff, a Professor of Linguistics at UC Berkeley, pushes liberals to reclaim terms like life, patriot, and family values.

Consider progressives across the country consistently saying something like this: “I am for life. That’s why I support the right of all women to receive prenatal care and the right of all children to receive immunizations and to be treated when they are sick. That’s why I believe we must safeguard the planet that sustains all life.”

Or perhaps this: “I am a patriot. That’s why I am compelled to oppose the government’s spying on American citizens without court order and in defiance of Congress.”

Say it again
At least Luntz and Lakoff agree on one thing: It’s all about repetition. Lakoff writes, “Repetition of such articulations is the key to redefining these words and reclaiming them.” Luntz says, “There’s a simple rule: You say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and you say it again, and then again and again and again and again, and about the time that you’re absolutely sick of saying it is about the time that your target audience has heard it for the first time.”

So don’t be surprised if we hear more “fragmented vs. integrated” talk coming out of Cupertino.

Shop or read?

Daniel J. Levengood tipped us off to the biking gear site Rivendell.

I’m in the market for new pedals for my bike and ran across this bicycle company called Rivendell.

The site had a different feel from the start, like the description to the Grip King Pedals I’m going to purchase. Very personal. The very type of information that I needed to understand what made these pedals different.

I think I navigated through the entire site, reading up on an array of different topics.

Here’s an excerpt of the pedals description Daniel mentions. It’s great in how opinionated and plain-spoken it is…

Grip Kings aren’t ten-times better than our other pedals, but the differences and refinements are truly upgrades, although technically hairsplitting ones. If you can spend this much for pedals (in this age of $150 to $350 ones), and you’re committed to pedaling without any connection, then go for these. They feel just fantastic under your feet—-like nubby, grippy frying pans. (not the hot kind).

If you’re just curious about pedaling “free” like this and/or you want something cheaper, go for our MKS Sneaker pedals. It’s in the “Related Products” section, and is still our Best Deal Pedal. Not e’en the Grip King will knock it off that exalted throne. Still, the GK is a killer deal.

...and it’s the same way throughout the site. For example, The Big Picture doesn’t shy away from bold pronouncements.

Most riders today are riding bikes that by our standards, are too small. They make you lean over too far, which puts too much weight on your hands, and too much strain on your arms, neck, and back.

If you’re a mid-50s rider of moderate fitness, but ride fewer than 3000 miles per year, and you want to ride longish and steepish hills, the standard road gearing you’ll find on virtually any stock road bike, is too high. You don’t need a top gear more than 100 inches. You’ll appreciate a low gear of 23-inches or less.

If you weigh more than 150 lbs and/or are not racing (meaning, even if you weigh 122 lbs and don’t race), the smallest tire you should ride is 27mm wide.

You may personally prefer welded frames, or fillet-brazed frames, and that’s fine. We prefer them lugged, and so that’s all we make.

Modern bikes have too many gears…Our attitude toward the number of cogs on the rear hub is: Seven is heaven, eight is great, nine is fine, ten is kind of getting ridiculous, but it won’t kill you.

Gotta love the lack of hemming and hawing there.