It’s finally happened. Apple has pumped out enough iPods, iPhones, and iPads to become the most valuable technology company in the world, surpassing software giant Microsoft in the market cap. Ten years ago, Apple was basically left for dead, but with a little innovation from cofounder and chief exec Steve Jobs and a lot of great new products, the software company is now valued at $222.12 billion, trailing only to Exxon Mobil as the highest valued American company. And while Jobs has yet to beat the giant, he has certainly taken the golden harp.

So how did this happen? The answer is in your hand; it’s your iPod, your iPhone, and now, it’s your iPad. Simply put, Jobs and Apple have profoundly changed the user experience – and they’ve done it through products that are sleek, fashionable, and highly functional. The iPod revolutionized the way we listened to our music, just as the iPhone made Smartphones more accessible and appealing to a much broader audience. And now the iPad, no matter how strange as it may seem, aims to change the way we think about our portable computers and how we use them.

This key is innovation. Jobs recognized the need for adaptable, mobile technology, even before anyone else did. Today, consumers demand technology innovations that are nimble, accessible, and practical. Touch screens seem much more sensible than an attached keyboard, just as a phone that acts as a computer is more efficient than two separate products. For too long, Microsoft has pushed the norm, and now has to play catch up while Apple continues to push the industry frontier.

As Mr. Jobs himself said, “Innovation distinguishes between a leader and a follower.” We couldn’t agree more.

With over 400 million users, Facebook is the world’s most trafficked social networking site. But recently it’s also become the most controversial. Why? One word, privacy.

The criticism has been rampant around the control, or lack thereof, of user privacy the website has implemented. The privacy controls are not user-friendly or clear for that matter. They have left many unsure of what the public can and cannot see on their pages. With the continuous success of the website, one would think Facebook would adapt more willingly to the wants and needs of their members. Lately, we have seen the opposite.

With the concerns over Facebook privacy festering, on May 25, 2010 Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg finally broke his silence on the issue. In a statement, Zuckerberg acknowledged the problems Facebook is currently having with privacy control, and admitted there were errors that needed to be fixed. He described the need for Facebook privacy settings to be easier to control for users- so they know who can and can’t see their private information. Zuckerberg concluded his statement alluding to the fact that changes will be made in the coming weeks that will better suit what users want to see.

This situation has left Facebook fighting for the credibility and loyalty they have achieved with their faithful following of users. This issue could have big implications. It’s already making some users question their relationship with the site. It’s a huge PR problem that playing out in traditional media and all over the web for the social media giant. It’s ironic that the very medium that made Facebook so powerful could now be its downfall.

We’ll have to follow this online battle closely to see if Facebook can revamp its privacy policy, win back the hearts and minds of its users and ultimately…save face.

For the past four years, cyclist Floyd Landis has lived by a single mantra: deny, deny, deny. After being stripped of his Tour de France title in 2006 for failing a doping test, Landis finally admitted that he was in fact using performance-enhancing drugs when he won the race. But rather than simply admitting to it and moving on with his life after years of legal struggle and public shame, he decided to point the finger at some of his former teammates, including the legendary Lance Armstrong.

In a series of emails sent to several cycling officials and sponsors, Landis accused Armstrong and others in using performance-enhancing drugs just hours before the start of the fifth stage of the Tour de California. So what was Lance to do? Wait until the end of the race to respond? Did he allow the accusations to simmer for a bit before confronting them? No, he confronted them head on, acting quickly and decisively. With hardly any time to spare before the beginning of Thursday’s race, the seven time Tour de France winner held a short press conference right outside his bus, saying he has “nothing to hide.”

From a PR perspective, this was a smart move by Lance. He is more than an individual― he is a brand, the personified form of LiveStrong. He has much more at stake than Floyd Landis or anyone in cycling for that matter. He could have just let this play out for a while before making a statement, but if he did, he would have only left room for people to speculate on these accusations. Not only was his reaction clear and concise, it was timely, and that may be even more important here. There is still going to be debate about whether or not these people were using PEDs, but for now, Lance is leading the PR pack on this one. He came out strong, he came out quick, and he got the message across. Maybe LiveStrong isn’t just a brand name after all.

Last month, David McCandless, author of Information is Beautiful, came up with yet another gorgeous infographic. This one delves into 13 colors and their emotional representation across the span of 10 cultures. The 84 emotions range from Anger to Joy to Success to Wisdom and how various cultures express that emotion with a particular color. It’s interesting to see the overlap. For example, the color Red is used a lot to represent Excitement, Love, Danger, Heat and Anger. At the same time, Love is also represented by Green, Yellow and Blue in other cultures.

These are just interesting things to take into consideration when dealing with, and designing for, global clients. For example, while Black might represent Death in Western / American, Japanese and Native American cultures, the Hindu and Chinese use White, South Americans use Green and Muslims use Silver. It’s interesting to see the spectrum of colors and how they’re used throughout a spectrum of emotions.

You say you want a food revolution? Well, my friends, come join us at the table.

Last week, the White House released a report that outlines steps to fight a national epidemic—childhood obesity. According to the report, “one in every three children ages 2-19 is overweight or obese.” As part of their suggested changes, the report is calling for food companies and junk food makers to go on what amounts to an “advertising diet.” Food companies are being asked to regulate all forms of marketing to children, and food retailers should avoid in-store marketing that promotes unhealthy products. This includes promotion of popular media characters. Could this be the end for Count Chocula and the Silly Rabbit?

Alas, the report is stirring up the ongoing debate among marketers, government leaders, and the general public—is advertising the sinister force wooing our kids into the obesity pit? We’ve seen this same argument in violent videogames and oversexed movies, among others. Advertisements have undoubtedly become a prominent form of persuasion. Young people view more than 40,000 ads per year on television alone. But will these “suggestions” create the right recipe for change?  After all, there are several other significant parts of the childhood obesity equation (i.e.: parents).

It’s clear that America is in the midst of culinary crisis. Our nation’s children are the first generation not expected to live as long as their parents. Though the Let’s Move campaign, First Lady Michelle Obama is tackling the cause, becoming a change leader alongside other food ambassadors like Michael Pollan and Alice Waters.

But while its 120 page report is certainly creating attention, in order to see real change, Let’s Move should integrate both top down and bottom up strategies—tapping the resilience, creativity and commitment of the whole system—from farm to fork. Grassroots efforts, such as Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution and Slow Food USA’s Time for Lunch campaign, show action and are often more appetizing approaches.

It will be interesting to watch how (and which) food companies and marketers will react.  Maybe they’ll brush the advice aside. Or perhaps they will see this as an opportunity to change their own eating habits and bite into a new marketing approach.

We’ll just have to wait and see…