Over on the latest JOHO, David Weinberger noodles a bit on the idea that all norms on the Web will be “forever in flux.”

I think he’s on to something that will be the case for at least for the next decade or two, and I think it reaches beyond snarkiness and sarcasm and social norms all the way to business plans.

Because as the online norms constantly (and necessarily) change, so too must the ways in which companies interact with those norms. Yesterday’s Big Damn Deal can easily become tomorrow’s *yawn* Big Deal before you can say “return on investment.”

Takeaway for marketers: Online, it’s all about being nimble and responsive. Is your company wearing running sneakers or cement shoes?

This video is making the rounds. Everywhere, even internationally. You’ve probably seen it already: It’s been featured on almost every news and entertainment outlet imaginable and it’s getting millions of views on YouTube. The girl, Lauren Caitlin Upton, appeared on The Today Show yesterday.

Why was she on The Today Show? Did she win the Miss Teen USA pageant in which she was entered? (No, she finished fourth.) Did she donate an enormous sum of money to help feed starving kids in Africa or write a brilliant first novel?

No on all counts. She gave a rambling and incoherent answer to a painfully simple question.

The Miss Teen USA pageant is part of the Miss Universe Organization, which says that their contestants “are savvy, goal-oriented and aware. The contestants who become part of the Miss Universe Organization display those characteristics in their everyday lives, both as individuals who participate in the competitions to advance their careers, personal and humanitarian goals, and as women who seek to improve the lives of others.”

Joking about all this is easy, but those of us involved in developing marketing communications materials, especially those with a kid or teen focus, should be doing a double-take when a simple question to a “savvy, goal-oriented and aware” young woman meets with this kind of an answer.

In a world where marketers want to reach savvy and aware young customers, maybe one’s definition of “savvy and aware” needs to be recalibrated … along with the vocabulary and grammar level of one’s marketing materials.

Takeaway for marketers: If savvy and aware Americans can’t find the U.S. on a world map, how can you expect them to find your product in a crowded retail aisle?

Conventional wisdom says that the Web is most used by young people. According to the Daily Mail, though, “silver surfers” are spending more time online than young whippersnappers between 18 and 24.

Takeaway for marketers: Conventional wisdom isn’t always most wise.

Wired was just one of the gazillion Web sites and newspapers recently reporting on how the CIA, the Vatican, the Democratic Party and others have been, um, updating Wikipedia entries.

This is sorta old news, but the story has stronger-than-usual legs because of Wikipedia Scanner, a new tool that matches IP addresses with Wikipedia edits to more easily reveal who is making those edits.

Here’s a page that details some of the most interesting recent edits.

Ultimately, this story will reflect more poorly on those caught doing self-serving edits than it will on the veracity of Wikipedia. If you’ve done any Wikipedia writing or editing, you probably already know that scrutiny of Wikipedia itself is far more intense than most people realize. You may get away with something, but not for long. Which is more or less what this article in today’s Times is about.

Takeaway for marketers: If you’re editing your company’s Wikipedia entry, do it from home. Oh, and edit objectively … because people will notice.

Web sites. Landing pages. Emails. What do they all have in common? They’re all viewed on a screen. Duh.

So given that, why are so many Web sites, landing pages and emails reviewed and approved in print? The short answer: Because those doing the reviewing and approving aren’t as comfortable with digital as they are with analog.

Someone who works at a major e-tailer that sends a lot of email recently fed one of my biggest pet peeves with war stories of management requesting printouts of emails for review and approval. I suspect anyone who works in the online world deals with nonsense like this to one degree or another.

The medium may or may not be the message, but the message ought to be reviewed and approved in the medium in which it’s presented. Reviewing a Web page in print seems to me to be as absurd as reviewing a radio commercial by reading the script or reviewing a print ad by looking at a scanned version on screen.

Takeaway for marketers: If it’s viewed on a screen, it should be reviewed on a screen.