Archive for the 'New Media' Category

29
Sep
09

wave hello to Google’s new baby …

The next ‘big thing’ in mass social communications is supposed to be Google Wave, announced in May and due for launch as a public Beta in a few days time.

Google Wave is designed to create a much broader conversation on the internet than you get from conventional e-mail and there is a lot of ‘early user’ enthusiasm which only makes it more difficult for outsiders to assess.

Our first sight of prototypes suggests a genuinely useful tool that acts as a communications dashboard with a serious commitment to privacy and personal control.

The general view from the techies, who are all aware that Google has an appalling reputation for innovations that don’t then become businesses, is cautiously positive – it works and it meets a need.

Widely touted as an Internet Explorer killer, this, rather than any hype surrounding its challenge to social networking, is where interest will lie in the coming months, creating much fun news copy in the Microsoft versus Google wars.

For the record, Microsoft has 67% of the browser market and Google Chrome has only 3%. Microsoft makes negative claims about Chrome security and Google snipes back but if Wave takes off, it might pose a serious threat to the dominant player. The suggestion that Chrome was created to permit Wave looks increasingly plausible.

Our best guess is that the style of Wave, half way between the traditional browser and the social network, will appeal to a segment of the market that is not entirely happy with either ‘extreme’. It wants more functionality on tap than the traditional browsers provide and it wants more control over its conversations than you can get in the social community.

There were, however, reports that it had been crashing at a rate of 25% of Waves with only 6,000 early users.  The initial 100,000 in the limited release are going to have to be reassured that the crash rate is very small.

But all new technologies have these teething problems. The new economic model permits errors to be seen and be managed by the public during private and public Beta phases - a culture very different from the ‘old’ one that tried to cover up failure and offer claims of perfection that never rang true in practice.

However, the ’spin’ that has centred on its ‘business-friendly’ nature should be treated with a little caution.

The aim, perfectly reasonable, is to get the public out of other tools and into Google’s and use products and services that have been piling up without an adequate central co-ordination point for consumers other than the original search tool.

It has always been a puzzle why the front page of the search engine has never been used effectively to market Google’s full offer. The emergence of Chrome and then Wave might explain this. The search engine is just the biggest tool in the tool-kit but it is not to be confused with the box itself.

There is a bigger picture here. Is a driver for all this also the creation of a mega-integrated platform that the marketing industry can make use of more easily?

Facebook is now used by 83 of North America’s biggest 100 advertisers – that means brands like Nike and AT&T – and this must be unnerving to Google whose massive resources will not protect it in the long run if America’s businesses, if not the world’s, do not use it to reach us on a daily basis.

The prize here is Google ownership of the world biggest integrated meme transit system, transporting all forms of content along its routes. Google is to be to information and service flows what a highway system is to the distribution of goods.

Not a highway but the highway, albeit  in competition as road is in competition with rail, air and shipping. In this analogy, the internet itself is not the highway at all but only the land and sea on which harbours, roads and track are built.

What is transported, of course, is none of the highway’s business, only the Government’s and that of the private individual or business, but Google’s position as the Jay Gould of the post-industrial age is an interesting one. Robber baron or philanthropist like Carnegie?

What Google Wave will become remains uncertain. The promotion of Google Wave as market research tool adds to the business-friendly ambience although little of what we have seen suggests a great deal of credibility in the proposition.

We are not getting overly excited about the claimed business potential. It still strikes us as a half-defensive manoevre.  Google Wave is just another useful tool in the armoury for business but it is not much more than that.

It certainly does not solve the problem of how to get more than a few thousand people clicking in approval on a campaign idea who don’t then forget that they have clicked.

As Wave is presented now, a marketing department might spend many valuable hours having a fascinating but ultimately fruitless debate (in terms of sales) in what may be little more than an entertaining if more efficient forum of the usual suspects.

If there is one thing the early phase of Facebook taught us, it was that mass social network campaigns should not be confused with mass social action.

The paid-for space in the small sidebar on the right hand side of the Facebook Profile page is probably still more valuable for advertisers than Group or Fan Pages that are easily ignored or edited out.

In the end, the claims of the marketing enthusiasts end up meaning more direct e-marketing, a technical and legal minefield if you want new names, or the integration of Wave-related addresses into wider marketing.

How else will you get interested strangers into your Wave? The quality of those being linked to from ‘out there’ might be quite poor unless Wave is used as part of a fairly expensive integrated marketing campaign where its role is, ultimately, ancillary.

Our view – take Google Wave very seriously, watch the space and don’t be surprised to see both some very clever people adapt it to a volatile market and rapid takeup, but don’t allow marketing enthusiasts to experiment with your money, claiming it as the next big thing.

Wait until you have seen two or three good campaigns that make use of it cost-effectively – that may take a fair time yet.

08
Sep
09

beyond the boredom of new media evangelism

If there is one thing that is driving us up the wall about the new media, it is the hysterical over-enthusiasm of its evangelists. Yes, these tools are useful. No, they are not going to change humanity.

Our approach to anything new is playful. One of us goes in and just works the system. After a while, we assess the new toy on a few very basic criteria:

  • how much time it takes up, and at what level within the company – we assess its opportunity cost against any other things that we might be doing with the time
  • whether our friends and followers provide sufficient critical mass (and are interested enough in the tool) to make the effort worthwhile
  • whether what we say is even going to be noticed by our audience – the speed of Facebook and Twitter in turning over information means that you have to have a reasonably sustained presence (which is a time cost).

There is a significant investment in time required to set up channels and to keep up with developments (we like TwitterTips for Twitter) and a very significant commitment to relevant content but entering links, once all this is done, is generally a matter of minutes at most. A link can be delivered to multiple destinations within seconds using tools like Ping.

Whether you should bother at all requires a fairly cold and clinical analysis that will weigh up an unsatisfactory present, where the benefits often seem less than obvious, against a possible future when the early user phase is over and the technology has integrated itself far more effectively into the marketing process.

At the moment, it is chaos out there. It can be fun but the truth is that a multiplicity of eager-beaver consultants are trying to sell what amounts to an edge based on personality, and some special skill that cannot easily be summarised in 140 characters, to a lot of other suppliers competing for the attention of purchasers who are actually not there at all!

The social media that impacts most on business tends either to be a world of journalists, business intellectuals and competing and hard-to-distinguish coaches, trainers and other flotsam and jetsam of late-capitalism or a gateway to highly specialised and focused groups of ‘linked-in’ professional specialists or business communities who are merely making their personal networking much more efficient.

In addition, something decidedly odd is happening in another sphere – the media sector. The official print media are being undermined at their point of maximum vulnerability by the way that these new networks enable the public to gut the internet for free information and then link it to their friends without a single penny changing hands. The ‘hit’ necessary to build online advertising revenue will only happen if a ‘friend’ goes behind the headline and clicks.

The most productive use, for example, that we have found for Twitter is as a free-to-use intelligence gathering system. Our account picks up in one place all the latest news on communications, public relations and the media sector.

An associated account covers international affairs and the bits of British politics that are not covered by a free visit to the BBC or Guardian websites. Yet another picks up the latest from the new media and associated technologies. Private accounts catch up on friends and personal interests.

We have now slashed our own print media purchasing budget – after all, the material now arrives long after it is interesting, has usually been placed for effect by someone like ourselves and takes up far more time to study than a swift morning review of Tweetdeck or a click on one of the web’s better aggregators.

This is getting seriously scary for the official print media because we are in a transitional phase when the marketeers, already under financial pressure, are pulling cash out of traditional channels but are not yet competing sufficiently with each other in diverting that cash into the new channels.

Online rates are holding up but they are not creating revenue streams anywhere near the level required to keep the lumbering elephants of print production going. The arrival of e-books (expected en masse within the next two or three years) will create expectations that all media will be digitally received.

At every level it is hurting: journalists are expensive and can’t do their job without adequate resources just as low cost new ‘amateur’ blogs are beginning to outclass them in investigative work; opinion is free on the internet and is often more insightful than the regurgitated spin of Government placed through a commentator; online entertainment and specialist information channels are now far more immediate than print in their analyses; and news aggregators (and the best of the online offshots of the conventional media, the BBC and Guardian) and mobiles mean that you can get the basic news anytime and anywhere for free once you have the hardware.

And do not underestimate the degree that the ‘fun’ of playing on social networks by mobile or at home can displace almost entirely the ‘fun’ of settling down and reading the newspaper. Remember – you are interacting with others where you choose the terms of the interaction.

The new social media may be displacing the conventional single print newspaper far faster than we may think, acting as mid-wife to a new, more specialised and audience-focused online media offer.

But they are at their best now as either suppliers of access to free information in an easily managable form from trusted sources or as enablers of existing personal and business networks to cohere better in order to trade – again, the theme of trusted networks.

These distribution channels also place a premium on the interest of the purchaser rather than the opinion of the seller. Before too long, where there is no personal interaction, a form of Darwinian selection may weed out the ‘evangelists’, happy clappies, flotsam and jetsam (except as a closed group who talk to each other) and replace them with bridges to serious and timely content production.

It is at that point that the new social media become a powerful marketing tool – when you know who is at the other end and your creative endeavours are directed precisely at the emotional and intellectual interests of your target. Hence, the intensity of the struggle over online privacy – total victory for the extreme privacy lobby could kill off the new media completely.

Assuming that Western culture does want to finance this transformation, the catalyst may be first news of Britney’s latest look or insider information on a change in a pipeline route. Whatever it is, the ‘punter’ will be driven, in less than 140 characters (the old ‘headline’), to come to you whether you provide the story for free or for a subscription.

Our calculation? – two to three years of living hell for the old system and then we are into a new ball game with the new.




 

March 2010
M T W T F S S
« Dec    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Copyright

©2009-2010 The Pendry White Partnership Limited. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Pendry White and Whiteboard with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.