Has the Pandemic Really Accelerated Digital Marketing Trends?

Jessica Hawthorne-Castro of Adweek argues that not only has the pandemic accelerated remote work and our adoption of delivery and home-based services, it has also accelerated digital marketing trends by up to a decade.

Her belief is that although millennials and younger generations were already online and using mobile to high degree, the experience of being homebound for months pushed older generations online to a greater degree for entertainment, work and social interactions. "Favorite engagement points included online video, pay-per-click advertising, social, CTV/OTT, sponsored content, mobile and email," she says.

Though she provides no evidence for this hypothesis, this is not an unreasonable supposition. More people at home means more people online. However, Hawthorne-Castro does not acknowledge the impact of the Apple's recent privacy changes and the threat of regulation from government.  Apple's changes alone significantly impacted Snapchat's reported earnings and share price, taking other social media giants with it.  

But Facebook and Google and resting on their laurels, and are beginning to develop alternative approaches to reaching targeted audiences without relying on cookies and targeting individuals.

However, in my opinion, this could actually drive up barriers to entry into offering digital marketing solutions, removing new entrants, and thus creating a situation where there is less innovation, because there is less competition. So my counter question is, have trends been accelerated, or have privacy changes and the threat of regulation entrenched a duopoly that might result in a decline in innovation in digital marketing overall?  

Time will tell.

Digital Privacy and Who Pays for the Internet?

I missed this great piece on the tension between digital privacy and firms on Madison Avenue from Brian Chen of the New York Times when it was published late last month.

Chen summarizes the recent privacy changes implemented by FANG companies and the impact on the effectiveness of digital marketing for big and small businesses.

In April Apple implemented the ability to turn off tracking for particular apps on iOS devices. Google announced plans to block cookies to its Chrome web browser in June. And Facebook announced last month plans to target ads to users without knowing any user specific information.

These changes have come about through a willingness of governments to regulate big tech more, the most well-known example being Europe's GDPR legislation, and through shifting consumer preferences toward privacy.

However Chen rightly points out that this change impacts the effectiveness of digital marketing spend, providing the example of Georgia pastry shop Seven Sister Scones whose Facebook advertising became significantly less effective after Apple's iOS changes, resulting in a drop of monthly revenue from $40,000 to $16,000 in May.

Naturally the implications here are that if digital marketing becomes less effective, then naturally more spend is required to sustain the same conversions and revenue, and thus cost of acquisition increases.  For businesses with tight margins, this may mean switching to more traditional forms of marketing in preference to digital, or if that is untenable, price increases.  Indeed, Seven Sister Scones raised prices 25%.

In this respect, these privacy changes couldn't come at a worse time for the economy, as treasury bond yields begin to increase and inflation fears begin to take hold. 

Advertising revenue sustains a great deal of the internet, so the question becomes - if digital marketing becomes too expensive, who pays for advertising-supported digital products and services?

Would you sell your iPhone usage data for $20 a month?

The latest scandal among the tech giants last week was that both Facebook and Google were found to have been paying selected users to allow the companies to track their usage on the iPhone. Apple has since shut both the backdoor research apps down, saying that they violated the special enterprise certificates that allowed both Facebook and Google to bypass the App Store, since their certificates were intended to internally distributed apps only.

Facebook was paying its users $20 a month, while Google allowed users to earn gift cards. A $20 price tag indicates that these companies are finding significant value in knowing exactly how users are interacting with their iPhone. This information could be used to serve more relevant ads to the users on their platforms; however, perhaps more valuable, both companies can use these insights to shape future product development knowing how its rivals’ customers are interacting with their products.

As more of our lives continued to be centered around our mobile phones this knowledge is becoming increasingly more valuable and its likely to see companies continue try to make a play to gain access to this usage data. Personally, I wouldn’t mind getting $20 a month which I could put towards my phone bill in exchange for how I used my phone, partly because I suspect Apple is doing this to some degree already anyway. How much would you need to turn over your mobile phone usage data?

Further Tech Crunch coverage:

• Overview of Facebook's 'Research' app
• Overview of Google's 'Screenwise' app
• Facebook's defensive of its 'Research' app

Marketing on the Apple Watch: terrible idea?

I’ve yet to be thoroughly convinced about the importance of wearable tech in our everyday lives. I think it’s far more niche than developers and marketers would have us believe.

However the application of wearable technology in the world of health and fitness is huge and is genuinely making a massive difference to the lives of a wide range of people. From athletes needing a convenient and accurate way to store data to regular people who just want to improve their everyday fitness with a pedometer. 

Outside of this though there is very little to convince me that the Apple Watch is little more than a device for people who are too lazy to take their phone out of their pocket when they receive an alert.  

There’s nothing that can be done on the watch that can’t be done on an iPhone. The difference is that on an Apple Watch it will be much smaller. Is anyone really going to look at Instagram on a 38mm screen?

As for advertising on the Apple Watch, imagine how irritating it would be if the basic function of a watch, showing you the time, is obscured by an ad too tiny to read.

That’s probably an extreme example, as the Apple Watch is notification-based and hopefully marketers have learnt from experience that an ad format served successfully on one device will not necessarily work just as well on a different one.

On a smartphone, marketers use notifications to advertise. These notifications only occur of course if the user has the specific app downloaded. If the notifications are too intrusive or frequent, the user will delete the app. 

Now translate that to a screen which is 81mm smaller and that you carry on your wrist all day long.

I’ll keep my old Casio thanks. It's got a calculator on it.

Source:https://econsultancy.com/blog/66181-one-of-the-more-sarcastic-apple-watch-articles-you-ll-read-today/

Implications of the Quantified Self

The emergence of mobile devices, constant connectivity, and big data has led to unprecedented visibility into our lives. We now constantly have applications tracking our searches, our likes, and every step we take (maybe even every breath we take?).

This parallel identity can be called the "quantified self"- the aggregation of all the actions we take online, collected into a measurable history from which a capable data scientist can construct an eerily accurate demographic and psychographic profile. This is fantastic news for marketers, and enables companies to more accurately target the right consumers with the right offers, at the right time (and increasingly, in the right place). We as consumers benefit from this as well- we receive less "spam" and irrelevant information, and receive better education and better deals on the things we actually care about. There's no doubting that the evolution of the quantified self has been good for business- but what about the effect on our personal lives?

The aforementioned trends started to remind me a lot of George Orwell's prescient novel 1984. As depicted in that novel, we now have "screens" that monitor us 24/7- our smartphones. While smartphones don't actively record us or every conversation that we have, they do collect an amount of personal data that would have shocked Orwell. Think for a minute about all of the data that Facebook is collecting on you- while Big Brother isn't watching you, Zuckerberg and his team certainly are.

The key distinction between 1984 and today is that an absolutist tyrannical government isn't forcing this upon us- we are all willingly signing up for this data collection when we sign the Terms of Use for every "free" app and service (as an aside- and not for the easily offended- South Park hilariously lampooned Apple's iTunes agreement in the "Human CentiPad" episode). Admit it- you never read those ridiculously long agreements- no one does. So who knows how your data is actually being used?

I believe that data today is (for the most part) being used purely for commercial, and not nefarious purposes. However, it will be an incredibly important issue for us to monitor as a society, as it appears that a small oligopoly of companies is collecting more and more data (think Facebook, Google, etc.). Also- behind the scenes, how are the NSA and other government agencies accessing our information? We don't know the answers to these questions, but they are questions that should impact how we conduct business, how we vote, and how we interact with technology.

Bringing the analogy full circle- Apple made a big splash early on with its 1984-inspired Super Bowl commercial. There's a certain element of irony that they now more closely resemble Big Brother than the hammer-throwing rebel that symbolized their brand in the commercial.

Sources:
http://pando.com/2015/03/06/as-the-quantified-self-industry-explodes-who-will-control-the-data-us-or-them/

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/03/opinion/beale-1984-now/

Apple Watch and Digital Marketing

I am writing this blog less than 24 hours from one of the most awaited moments of this year in Technology, the launch of Apple Watch on March 9. There have been so many rounds of discussions speculating about the Apple Watch.
I read couple of articles related to Apple Watch and its launch.

http://www.wired.com/2015/03/apple-march-9-event-what-to-expect/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/watch/11454514/Apple-Watch-latest-rumours-and-facts.html

But what really is an Apple Watch? Apple’s CEO Tim Cook calls it the most personal product the company had ever made. It would be a smartwatch with a rectangular sapphire-coated display which can be paired with an iPhone through WiFi or Bluetooth. Apple’s products have always created revolution in the world of technology and its close competitors especially Google would be more than eager to learn about it and also ensure they have a better answer.

As a student of Digital Marketing, I am keen to understand how Apple Watch would impact the Digital Marketing world. To answer that, I did some research to find how major technology innovations or launches have always made a significant impact in the world of Digital Marketing. Right from the launch of Google as search engine to the launch of I-phone and I-Pad, marketers had to adapt to the new technologies. Certainly, Apple Watch could be one of those major innovations for which the smart marketers should start preparing immediately.

One of the speculations is that the relevance and usefulness of ads would be even more important. In other words, it would be easier for a user to ignore an ad that is not relevant to him or her. This would mean that advertisers need to increase the number of methods and devices at their disposal through which to reach consumers making the relevance and usefulness of their ads much more important.

Another speculation is that location based marketing could be even more relevant. App developers could create some programmatic alerts that sense when an Apple Watch user is in close proximity. Accordingly, a store or restaurant can virtually “tap” the nearby user on the wrist to get their attention, and that person could be offered a promotional coupon valid for few minutes. It would promote the real-time location based advertising and also lead to some technological innovations on that front too. The digital content would need to be tailored to this new delivery method with short, simple messages and photos.

Last but not the least, it is also speculated that the smart watch would have the ability to continuously monitor a user’s heart-beat. There have been numerous studies correlating human behavior with the heart beats. This would be a completely new parameter that marketers never had information about and would further help marketers better understand consumer engagement with individual ads.

Still lots of questions related to Apple Watch are yet to be answered. I am eagerly waiting for the launch tomorrow to find those answers.

  

Reference:

http://www.launchdigitalmarketing.com/mobile/three-ways-the-apple-watch-will-change-digital-marketing/

Three Marketing Lessons from Apple Emoji: Embracing Diversity or Simply Racist?

Apple recently released its updated emoji list, adding up more diversity to its current palette. Along with new national flags, an Apple Watch icon for 'watch' and updated iPhone 6 icon for 'phone', varying skin tones of characters attracted vast attention, including heated criticism from Asian consumers.

Users can now click and hold on the icon to change the skin tone on OS X 10.10.3 as well as iOS 8.3 beta 2. It is fun that we can now have Santa in different colors, and while general public celebrates the introduction of different type of family as advocating equal rights for LGBT families, Asian consumers are not too impressed with those 'ultra-yellow' emojis.

A microbloggers wrote, "It looks like the yellow people have jaundice". The single post received thousands of likes on Chinese social media Weibo. Due to the long racist history of using "yellow" to describe Asians, many found the bright yellow tone uncomfortable or inaccurate. 'This can't be an Asian person', many said, and even more claimed that they are not inclined to use such emoji to describe themselves or their friends. (For more try weibo.com and search for a keyword combination of '苹果'-Apple,'表情' - Emoji, '黄'-yellow)

Regardless of the pathetic technical reasons that the yellow is simply brought by a standard set by UNICODE, what could we marketers learn from this unfortunate backfire when taking ethnical groups into account?

1. Don't think too highly of yourself. 
It gets extremely complicated when marketing on a global scope - different cultures, different rituals, and different traps that you definitely hope to avoid. Your Asian friend might be okay with the super hilarious campaign to use in Taiwanese market - I personally very much enjoy the French comedy Qu'est-ce qu'on a fait au Bon Dieu? (Serial Bad Weddings) where a Chinese son-in-law is constantly laughed about trying too hard to please the in-laws, but the case would hardly be the same if the movie is to be broadcast over a Chinese national network. Take your time. Research your consumers. And be extremely generous when it comes to running tests on ethnical topics.

2. Monitor the social media your target actually use.
High conversion rate of Facebook Ads? Yes. Instagram great for luxury marketing? Yes. Your global consumers care about them? It depends. Line, Wechat, Kakao Talk, Weibo, and many other social platforms that I may have little knowledge of might be the center of world for your target consumers. If your new campaign has been retweeted thousands of times, try to get some sleep before you excitedly tell your colleagues several time zones away to work on it immediately. Those paying for your product might never own a Twitter account.

3. React. FAST.
No excuse to wait longer even if complaints are breaking out in another part of the earth. If negative comments appear, try to act as promptly as possible as if your boss is watching from your back. If the bright yellow color is a UNICODE default and not Apple's fault, let your consumers know. While I can find a detailed and convincing article explaining the yellowish color in English, I have yet to find any similar content in the Chinese world. And it has been FOUR DAYS since the initial controversy blurt out.

Apple improves its retargeting capabilities

Apple and AdRoll have joined in partnership so that AdRoll's retargeting and programmatic buying capabilities will be available for Apple's advertising platform product, iAd. On top of this new partnership, Apple will also allow advertisers to target potential customers on iTunes and the app store as well. Some of the features that advertisers will be able to leverage to retarget ads include gender, device type, location, behavior such as app category preferences and frequency of use, and personal interests. This means an advertiser can target users who have visited their site and performed specific actions such as, read specific types of books, or played certain types of games. This puts Apple in the midst of the battle for mobile advertising among other large players such as Facebook and Google.

Source: VentureBeat

Burberry and Apple Collaboration for Fashion Week

Last week, Burberry partnered with Apple to promote its spring women’s collection by exclusively using the iPhone 5S to capture images and video before, during and after their recent London show.  It’s been reported that Apple initiated this partnership potentially seeing this as an opportunity to highlight the newest phones video and image capturing abilities as a product for the everyday person fitting for a high end fashion photographers. The iPhone recorded show was broadcast across 11 social networks, its own digital flagship site and through 13 live-streams on outdoor screens set up in locales from New York’s Times Square to Hong Kong’s Worldwide House. Thanks to the company's Twitter efforts, this campaign had a real-time reach that resulted in tens of millions of impressions for content relating to the event. Photos taken with the mobile device were also broadcast on large-scale outdoor screens in the aforementioned international cities.

The 11 Platforms used?

·         Instagram: http://instagram.com/burberry#

·         Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/burberry

·         Twitter: https://twitter.com/Burberry

·         Google+: https://plus.google.com/+Burberry/posts

·         YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/Burberry

·         Pinterest: http://www.pinterest.com/burberry/

·         LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/company/burberry

·         Japan’s Sumally: http://blog.sumally.com/2013/02/28/burberry-on-sumally/

·         China’s Sina Weibo: http://e.weibo.com/burberry

·         Douban: http://site.douban.com/burberry/

·         Youku: http://www.youku.com/show_page/id_z2c5a80a83d6d11e097c0.html

Angela Ahrendts, Burberry’s chief executive officer, said in an interview after the show, “Social media is as important as search, as print, as outdoor, because you’re reaching a totally different consumer…You can either put it out there or let them say whatever they want, but we prefer to lead the conversation, fill it with rich content, to start a higher level discussion. And why not? I think that’s great branding today.”

Some digital marketing professionals noted that Burberry scaled back on social media advertising spending, devoting fewer dollars to promoted posts and ads on Facebook, and is investing more heavily in e-commerce operations. It’s possible the brand will rely on this latest partnership and the publicity it brings to drive sales in the United States, Japan, and China.

http://www.wwd.com/media-news/digital/burberrys-spring-show-goes-global-7160355?src=search_links

Microsoft Office Coming To iPad Next Year, Says Report

THANK GOD! I think the move to distribute MS office on ipads will help both companies... It willl allow for greater business usage and greater productivity. I'm a huge fan of both ms office and ipad, so i think like many, will consider it a win win.

------------
Apple Could Have Three iPads For Sale Next YearMicrosoft may be bringing Office to the iPad next year, according to a report in The Daily.

The report cites unnamed sources, and says that Microsoft will also update its version of Office for the Mac next year.

On a business level, it might make sense -- the iPad is making inroads into enterprise, and having some sort of Office client available for it would let Microsoft earn at least some money from these Apple invaders. It would also help ensure that Office 365 -- the company's cloud-based business services -- would work on the iPad.
Microsoft might even do this at the risk of driving some enterprise customers to stick with iPads instead of adopting Windows 8 tablets. After all, Office and related back-end products has been driving Microsoft's growth for the last year, while Windows sales have been pretty stagnant. And Microsoft has built a version of Office for the Mac for more than a decade now.
But there are a couple possibly relevant facts that the report did not mention:
OneNote came out for iOS in January. OneNote, a note-taking app, is now considered one of the four core Office apps -- Excel, Word, and PowerPoint are the others. In January, Microsoft released a version of OneNote for the iPhone. It works on the iPad, but isn't optimized for it. Perhaps Microsoft is simply creating an iPad-specific version of OneNote. Or maybe that really was the first wedge.
Microsoft has NEVER released Office for the Mac in the same year (or before) Office for Windows. Microsoft is heads down building Office 15 for Windows. It's going to be a ton of work -- in particular, Microsoft will have to revamp it to work with the Windows 8 tablet interface, or risk having it relegated to traditional PCs only (and having one less reason for customers to choose Windows 8 tablets). The Mac version of Office almost always comes a year after the Windows version. It COULD be different this time, but that would require a diversion of resources to a minority platform (the Mac still has less than 5% market share for personal computers).
Microsoft didn't exactly deny the report, saying through a spokesperson:
"We already deliver Office on multiple platforms and devices and are committed to expanding in the future, but have nothing further to share today."
That little bit -- "committed to expanding in the future" -- is worth noting. There are only a few major platforms out there, and Office is already on three of them: Windows, Windows Phone, and the Mac. Or four if you include OneNote on iOS. So expanding to the iPad is not crazy.

http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-office-coming-to-ipad-next-year-says-report-2011-11?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Triggermail&utm_medium=email&utm_term=SAI%20Chart%20Of%20The%20Day&utm_campaign=SAI_COTD_112911

Can a tech company surpass big oil?

Recent discussion as to the battle of Apple and Exxon Mobil for the top spot in global company size by market cap has been heating up recently. It's not much of a surprise to many that Exxon Mobil has been at the top for awhile, with the global dominance in energy and oil, and a market cap near half a trillion dollars. But with the rise, especially in the past decade, of Apple's clout on the tech market, many believe Apple can take the top position. Despite the passing of the iconic Steve Jobs, the culture and mindset of the Apple ecosystem can and will continue to dominate innovation, content creation, sales and distribution, and tech device market (including both and hardware & software) for many years to come. The question is if the company is truly worth beyond half a trillion dollars, and if so, what is the true valuation of Apple?

Apple Gets Its Wings

Well, it finally happened. Apple is joining the cloud. This week the site launched the iCloud for developers. The company also unveiled its iCloud pricing, which includes 5 GB of free cloud storage, and additional storage at about $2 per GB per year. Developers and the media all seem to be ecstatic over the iCloud. My question is: isn't this so obvious? People are obviously always on the go, using many different devices and want to be able to access their things wherever they are. The cloud itself has been in existence for quite a while and used by companies such as Amazon. Why did it take such a long time for Apple to get on the bandwagon and why is it causing such a hoopla when this has clearly been done before?

This reminds me of a similar situation with Amazon and Barnes & Noble. Amazon was the first to launch an eBook reader- the Kindle. Barnes & Noble waited and iterated until it was able to release something to the market that it thought was perfect and could beat Amazon- the nook. Yet Barnes & Noble hasn't been able to catch up to Amazon's head start. The retailer hasn't been able to make up the ground it lost. Yet when Apple waits and perfects something, the company's seen as smartly waiting for just the right moment. This seems to be exactly the case with the iCloud. Apple will probably bring the cloud to the masses and become that much more popular when it launches. When launching a new product, timing is critical. And this of course, in additional to its flawless execution, is the key to Apple's success. Once again, it seems like Apple can just do no wrong.

10 reasons to hate iPad or why no one should ever buy it...

It’s been said a lot recently about iPad and one common thing observed in all reviews is that people tend to split into those who realize all disadvantages of this gadget and those who simply overlook them trying to convince themselves that this device is well worth the money they wasted on it. Well, I’m a very rational person and simply knowing all disadvantages of iPad I can’t even think of buying it. So here is the list of what makes me skeptical about it:

1) No Multi-Tasking. Yeah, this one bothers me the most. 5-years old symbian-enabled Nokia phone can do it, so why the device that Steve Jobs calls a "magical and revolutionary " can not? Why can’t someone listen to music while browsing the web? Twitting while reading? What the heck? For a device that intended to be a substitution for laptops/netbooks and costs as much as the iPad does, the inability to multitask is unforgiving.

2) No Camera. Yeah, the same old Nokia has camera, 2 actually. I can’t say what is worse: not to have a front-facing camera for video-chats or not-having a back camera which should be natural for a such mobile device. Camera now is commodity. Very cheap commodity. And I see no reason not to include it. Even iPhone which I don’t like either has 2-3mp camera.

3) No USB. Since its inception in 2001 miniUSB became a standard for mobile devices. Then it was followed by microUSB. But Apple always has its own way. And usually this way is quite awkward (recall how long Apple was torturing its users with PowerPCs). Only Apple with its hunger for $ that could be earned on proprietary adapters (adapter for USB for god’s sake) could do it.

4) No Flash. End of last month Steve Jobs published very unusual letter that ended up with very thoughtful claim: “Flash is no longer necessary”. Yes, Steve, perhaps for you. But I’d still prefer to be able to browse many web-sites, play games and watch videos. Perhaps this guy believe in HTML5 – but Apple took no action in its development and it will be another 2-3 years before it takes off.

5) No VoIP. Sounds weird? But that’s true. As Dan Neary, Skype VP, stated this week: “I think the iPad is an exciting product but it is clearly not the same communications device in its current form that the iPhone is. So we’re looking forward to further advancements in the iPad and where that can go in the future.” Politically correctly, indeed. But the point is clear: I think he said the same earlier this year when Skype discontinued its Windows Mobile support.

6) Small storage. 16-64Gb – what is it? Are you kidding? My external hard drive is 1500Gb. My 500$ laptop is 320Gb. My tiny USB stick is 16Gb. It’s not a Nook, nor a Kindle that are supposed to store mainly books. This is a multimedia device and memory is crucial. And we all know that Apple never gives us a chance to increase memory in its devices.

7) Lack of widescreen. New iMac is 16:9. iPhone is 3:2. iPad is 4:3. The past is back. Welcome and enjoy almost forgotten old-TV experience.

8) No GPS on pure-WiFi versions. Many called iPad a giant iPhone. It’s not quite true. iPad is worse in all aspects except it’s bigger. And GPS is not exception: iPad for $699 doesn’t have it.

9) Poor reading experience. Unique combination of a heavy weight and the glare on the screen makes using iPad for a long periods “a battle for comfort”. Unlike with Kindle one can’t read well in direct sunlight with iPad. Moreover you can’t download books you bought from Apple bookstore for your iPad to your Mac or iPhone.

10) Price. I kept it for a last but it’s a very important aspect for many. $699 for 64GB for pure-WiFi and $829 for 64 GB for WiFi/3G model – come on, Lenovo’s IdeaPad S10-3t does it all for less than $500 and boasts much better specs than any generation of iPad is likely to have. Modern netbooks start from $250 and by $499, which is starting price for 16Gb iPad, you have a big choice of very good devices. Add to it quite expensive apps and it’s hard to believe in Job’s intention “to put this (device) in the hands of lots of people”.

You are not yet convinced with these 10? Then consider some “bonus”: no SD slot, no HDMI out, closed apps (i.e. you don’t have a choice for pre-installed programs like browser), use of microSIMs (the whole purpose of it was to fit into devices otherwise too small for a mini-SIM – and it’s not iPad for sure), poor reviews on keyboard experience and quality of WiFi receiver.

And yes, I do realize that some of these drawbacks were made by Apple intentionally as a part of their strategy of introducing more advanced models a year or so later after the first release. I think about it as a unique way of Apple to minimize its R&D costs – there are so many simple things missing in iPad that you can add them in the new models another 2-3 years. And while it may be a good strategy from marketing standpoint, it completely undermines my view of iPad as an innovative product.

So my suggestion: wait for HP Slate and MS Courier later this year just to see the differences yourselves or buy a good netbook from Acer or Lenovo already now.

CBS May Be Making Online TV Even Cheaper

In a move that could spell even lower value perception by consumers for online media content, Mashable reports that CBS's Les Moonves is hinting that the price point for television programs may be lowered to $0.99 saying, "There are certain shows that will be sold on Apple for 99 cents."

The question is whether this shift, which Apple's iTunes has been pushing for, will be followed by other TV content providers. If so, as consumers shift more to watching content online and the value of commercials on traditional cable and network outlets becomes less and less, where will the money to create this content come from? And where will this democratization of content creaton lead the industry? How will we ever be able to produce such quality content such as Survivor and Fear Factor on 99 cents an episode?

Is the tablet really more imporatnt the the State of the Union

Apple is supposedly announcing a new device tomorrow, the fabled tablet. The blogosphere and the internet as a whole are going nuts about this. So much so that it is now the #1 trending search topic online. More people are interested in this than in what Obama has to say about health care, the wars, Haiti and all the rest.

http://gawker.com/5456613/steve-jobs-is-walloping-the-president-with-his-magic-tablet

I think it actually makes sense. After all, we all know exactly what Obama is going to say: "Ladies and Gentlemen, the State of the Union is Strong." However, very few people know what exactly is this tablet - is it just a giant iPod touch or is it the device that'll kill all traditional media outlets. Perhaps more importantly, we pretty much know how much the healthcare reform bill is going to cost us. The price of the tablet is still unknown.

Jonathan Shulman