Today’s New York Times “Digital Domain” section addresses the ongoing dilemma of the overcrowded email inbox. Mentioning “email bankruptcy” and general anxiety in response to mounting emails, the article outlines several services established to help alleviate this predicament, including “ClearContext (sorts Outlook inbox messages by imputed importance), Xobni (offers a full communications history within Outlook for every sender, as well as very fast searching), Boxbe (restricts incoming e-mail if the sender is not known), and RapidReader (displays e-mail messages, a single word at a time, for accelerated reading speeds that can reach up to 950 words a minute).”
Of course, this concern is not a novel one (the article even references the habits of those proficient in responding to correspondence, including journalist H. L. Mencken’s practice of typing a response to each letter on the day it was received), but it does draw attention to a negative aspect of the Web 2.0 environment: information overload. With a culture empowered by the glamour of participation on the web through numerous social networks and blogs, the luxury of real time communication comes with the expectation of instantaneous response. This immediate reaction, let alone a carefully crafted reply, might not always be possible considering the sheer volume of options the Internet provides. The beauty of Web 2.0 rests on the assumption of near constant interaction with content, but for any individual, this expectation can become overwhelming.
Ultimately, the author suggests checking email infrequently throughout the day. This recommendation, while soothingly simple, flies in the face of the constant connection on which the Web 2.0 user experience—and marketing promise—is based.
Full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/technology/20digi.html?em&ex=1208836800&en=5aec939ff6296bbd&ei=5087%0A
Sunday, April 20, 2008
TMI (too much information)
I caught an item in Wired magazine this month, but hasn't been posted on their site yet. This post (http://www.jackhumphrey.com/fridaytrafficreport/friday-traffic-report/clive-thompson-stole-my-phrase-information-overlord/) is a decent, albeit opinionated, synopsis of the article, which discusses the sheer amount of information we are inundated with nowadays. There are blogs, podcasts, keeping up with our social networks through sites such as Facebook and linkedin, not to mention bookmarklet sites such as del.icio.us. You end up bookmarking or emailing yourself notes on so many sites to follow-up with later on, and somehow we never do.
Twine (check it out at twine.com) is one potential solution to all of this. Through fancy-shmancy algorithms and science stuff, twine takes all of your links, bookmarks and emails and recommends mega-tailored sites that you would/should be interested in. Wired contributor Clive Thompson gave it a shot and said he got some cool results. My immediate reaction to all of this is that it is yet another destination that must be added onto the list of our "must-visit" sites each time we log onto the net. A neat way to address it could be a twine toolbar that is always present within your internet browser. Latest recommendations could be accessible with the click of a button. New recommendations from twine could be heralded with a ring tone and a flashing exclamation point, in old-school ICQ style.
But what of the marketing implications? Can twine accept ad dollars and still maintain it's pseudo-scientific objectivity? And with an increasing amount of published content out there that's as much commercial as it is editorialized (see: our recent guest lecturer from thrillist.com, and the ascent of ad-sponsored blogs), who's to say what's an ad and what's not an ad these days? One way that twine could approach the issue is by being explicit with its users. Perhaps label the "pure" search results as such, and present sponsored results in a separate window, under the premise that "given your interests, these products are most likely of interest to you." One can only imagine some percentage of users giving those hits a chance every now and then, if nothing but to satiate their curiosity.
Twine (check it out at twine.com) is one potential solution to all of this. Through fancy-shmancy algorithms and science stuff, twine takes all of your links, bookmarks and emails and recommends mega-tailored sites that you would/should be interested in. Wired contributor Clive Thompson gave it a shot and said he got some cool results. My immediate reaction to all of this is that it is yet another destination that must be added onto the list of our "must-visit" sites each time we log onto the net. A neat way to address it could be a twine toolbar that is always present within your internet browser. Latest recommendations could be accessible with the click of a button. New recommendations from twine could be heralded with a ring tone and a flashing exclamation point, in old-school ICQ style.
But what of the marketing implications? Can twine accept ad dollars and still maintain it's pseudo-scientific objectivity? And with an increasing amount of published content out there that's as much commercial as it is editorialized (see: our recent guest lecturer from thrillist.com, and the ascent of ad-sponsored blogs), who's to say what's an ad and what's not an ad these days? One way that twine could approach the issue is by being explicit with its users. Perhaps label the "pure" search results as such, and present sponsored results in a separate window, under the premise that "given your interests, these products are most likely of interest to you." One can only imagine some percentage of users giving those hits a chance every now and then, if nothing but to satiate their curiosity.
5 Studios Form a New JV to Ride the New Wave of PayTV and VOD
Viacom, MGM Studios, and Lionsgate announced this afternoon that they have decided to come together in a joint venture that will launch payTV and video on demand (VOD) services in the fall of 2009. This new JV will combine premium content produced by five major studios: Paramount, Paramount Vantage, MGM, United Artists, and Lionsgate.
The venture was formed to focus on online distribution in addition to premium TV and VOD oriented towards the consumer. This definitely changes things in the world of premium television content as the current kings of premium television content, HBO, Showtime, and Starz, are knocked out of their thrones. CBS's premium channel Showtime is especially hurting from this new deal. It is safe to assume that Showtime's current output deals with Lionsgate, MGM, and Paramount, which are set to expire soon, will not be renewed.
With Viacom as the lead investor and providing operational support (including marketing and affiliate services) though its MTV Networks division, the new JV is looking to not only provide premium films and original television, but it is also looking to change the whole game entirely. Philippe Dauman, CEO of Viacom states:
This venture has the potential to be a game changer for the industry. We are building an innovative service that will use traditional and new digital distribution technologies to bring great film and television entertainment directly to the consumer. By combining the output of Paramount with MGM and Lionsgate, two film and television powerhouses, we are creating a premium film and television programming brand with unique flexibility to bring consumers the very best blockbuster movies and innovative TV series.
While the specifics of the venture's future plans are being kept under wraps for now, it is clear that the entertainment and media world will be watching closely for new developments as the fall of 2009 draws closer.
Sources: PR Newswire, Paidcontent.org story, Paidcontent.org interview
The rise of "my"
I stumbled across this article in today’s NYTimes in the Style section, about the rise of “my.” websites – mycoke, mySpace, etc.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/fashion/20website.html?_r=1&ref=fashion&oref=slogin
ven at Columbia, we have my.gsb.columbia.edu, our personalized, individual website for information about our classes and other activities. For marketers, they see these sites as a way to make consumers feel valued and attended to. What marketers get by fulfilling this psychological need is valuable data – email addresses, date of birth, name, location, and sometimes even your interests. But is it a fair trade? I think not. When the rise of the “my” started, I figured it must have been an acronym for something, because marketers couldn’t be as naïve to think that simply putting “my” in front of a website would make me like the site, or the product, better. But, how wrong I was! While it may have been valuable at first, to those who understood the concept, the value has since been diluted through over use. “My”, in my opinion, is becoming as standard and generic as “.com”. And besides mySpace and perhaps my personalized Google homepage, none of these “my” sites even feel personal. I may be alone, but I am not a fan.
Ways for online ads to go offline
With the technologies such as RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) and GPS, messages to customers can be in the right place at the right time.
RFID, in general, is used to track inventories and provide information on digital screen about what items customers picked up. For further uses of this technology, a store can offer key fobs, with RFID, to its best customers. As a customer walks into the store, the RFID technology will signal the arrival and transmit the data about today's promotions, and since the store has a history about the purchase of this member, the appropriate information will be transmitted to the customer according to individual interests. This application is quite important to the retail business as in-store experience has an influence on the purchase from customers.
In regard to the GPS technology, local businesses may be included in the map shown on the touch screen in a cab. This could help add some advantages to local stores in the area with tough competion.
For full article: http://www.internetnews.com/mobility/article.php/3741056/Online+Ads+Find+Their+Way+Into+The+Offline+World.htm
Pachara
RFID, in general, is used to track inventories and provide information on digital screen about what items customers picked up. For further uses of this technology, a store can offer key fobs, with RFID, to its best customers. As a customer walks into the store, the RFID technology will signal the arrival and transmit the data about today's promotions, and since the store has a history about the purchase of this member, the appropriate information will be transmitted to the customer according to individual interests. This application is quite important to the retail business as in-store experience has an influence on the purchase from customers.
In regard to the GPS technology, local businesses may be included in the map shown on the touch screen in a cab. This could help add some advantages to local stores in the area with tough competion.
For full article: http://www.internetnews.com/mobility/article.php/3741056/Online+Ads+Find+Their+Way+Into+The+Offline+World.htm
Pachara
UK Online Spending Ad Spending to Beat TV in '09
In '09, spending on online advertising will surpass that of TV ads in the UK, according to a report from the Internet Advertising Bureau. I find this a bit surprising... moreso, because it is happening now. I do believe that internet and traditional media will one day merge as one, but I thought that would occur when The Jetsons came to town, not now.
The article gives great points on why the Bureau expects to see the change in spending habits. One is the fact that online marketing budgets are the last to be slashed.
Guy Phillipson says the economic downtrun is responsible.
"Online budgets are pretty much ring-fenced. Marketers can see exactly where their money is going, and it's the last medium to have budgets cut," Mr. Phillipson said. "Given a choice between traditional and online media, you'd maintain your online spend."
In 2007, UK online advertising spending budgets totaled $5.6 billion. With a 30%+ growth expected in 2008, and a strong 2009, online ad spending with surpass TV's which had only $8 billion.
http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=126457
The article gives great points on why the Bureau expects to see the change in spending habits. One is the fact that online marketing budgets are the last to be slashed.
Guy Phillipson says the economic downtrun is responsible.
"Online budgets are pretty much ring-fenced. Marketers can see exactly where their money is going, and it's the last medium to have budgets cut," Mr. Phillipson said. "Given a choice between traditional and online media, you'd maintain your online spend."
In 2007, UK online advertising spending budgets totaled $5.6 billion. With a 30%+ growth expected in 2008, and a strong 2009, online ad spending with surpass TV's which had only $8 billion.
http://adage.com/digital/article?article_id=126457
"Gossip Girl" Goes Offline
I don't watch this show, but I'm sure many 18-34 year old fans of "Gossip Girl" who can't catch it when it airs on the CW are bummed right now. The network, a collaboration between Time Warner and CBS, announced that the next 5 episodes of this show will not be aired online. You can only see it when it broadcasts on the CW.
"For these next five weeks, the epicenter of the 'Gossip Girl' universe will be on the CW's broadcast television airwaves," said Dawn Ostroff, president-entertainment of the network, which is a joint venture of CBS Corp. and Time Warner.
Ratings for the show have been slipping. Bad rating = lower ad revenues = cancellation. In response, the networks execs have decided to, in a sense, force its fans to watch the broadcasts versus seeing it online or via DVR. CBS's "Jericho" was recently pulled due to low ratings, despite a huge online fan base . When the network canceled it, there was a strong fan response, prompting CBS to return the show for another season. However, the lack of viewership re-sealed Jericho's fate.
In short, while television networks love to see us active on their websites, they'd rather us watch their commercials on the TV.
http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=126506
"For these next five weeks, the epicenter of the 'Gossip Girl' universe will be on the CW's broadcast television airwaves," said Dawn Ostroff, president-entertainment of the network, which is a joint venture of CBS Corp. and Time Warner.
Ratings for the show have been slipping. Bad rating = lower ad revenues = cancellation. In response, the networks execs have decided to, in a sense, force its fans to watch the broadcasts versus seeing it online or via DVR. CBS's "Jericho" was recently pulled due to low ratings, despite a huge online fan base . When the network canceled it, there was a strong fan response, prompting CBS to return the show for another season. However, the lack of viewership re-sealed Jericho's fate.
In short, while television networks love to see us active on their websites, they'd rather us watch their commercials on the TV.
http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=126506
Farmers Market(ing)?
I thought this was an interesting article. Very short. But it talks about a division of DuPont Co. buying stake in an online marketing company that helps grain farmers connect to buyers.
When I first saw the title of the article, "Pioneer invests in online grain marketing service," I thought simply farmers were going online... So. What's the big deal. But then considered how huge this could be for the ethanol industry and the farmers that want the sure-to-be many buyers to know that they are out there and ready to do business.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iwTA_6VoRb0GDMvQ-FLwiZXwVCpAD903PATO1
When I first saw the title of the article, "Pioneer invests in online grain marketing service," I thought simply farmers were going online... So. What's the big deal. But then considered how huge this could be for the ethanol industry and the farmers that want the sure-to-be many buyers to know that they are out there and ready to do business.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iwTA_6VoRb0GDMvQ-FLwiZXwVCpAD903PATO1
Goodbye Online Banking! Hello Mobile!
25% of US online banking users have told comScore they are interested in mobile banking in their "April 2008 Online Banking Report". And according to TowerGroup, this number will only increase in the following years:
Although security concerns in the use of mobile banking have been an issue just as they are in online banking, people seem to be shifting some of their basic banking tasks from online to mobile. In great measure, I think this is due to the boom in online identity theft and fraud that has been going on lately. For instance, making balance requests through your mobile somehow seems more secure than doing it online. Each time, you need to dial a special number, you have to enter your bank account and a code that will access your account and you get an automated voice tell you your balance. I think that is pretty cool. You don't need a computer to do it. You can access your information from anywhere and your information seems less 'trackable' than if you consult your balance online. If you pair this with the fact that we're using debit cards more and more even for small purchases, it is great to be able to have access to your balance anywhere. It sounds quite logical that the shift from online to mobile banking is taking place.
For other types of transactions, the key to mobile banking might be for banks to come up with ways of keeping it simple and secure. Whether the on-site and online banking experience can be replaced by mobile banking... that's a whole other story. As technology and browsers integrated in mobile devices become better, faster and more sophisticated, this might happen. However, call me old fashioned, I still believe some of the most complicated transactions will still require of a human to human interaction.
The eMarketer Banking Online report will be published next month and it would be rather interesting to see what findings and trends they show.
Open Source Census
Although we briefly talked about open source in class, here’s some news about it from the business side on nytimes.com. The article reports that an Open-source management company called OpenLogic launched the Open Source Census, which is the first detailed survey to find out how businesses use open source software. The purpose behind this survey is to deal with “the lack of information that accompanies the lack of proprietary licensing restrictions,” which has been a long-standing problem in the open-source world. In fact, according to open-source specialists, businesses often are unaware of the type of open-source software that is installed in their systems while analyst firms use guesswork to estimate the adoption of open-source in businesses. As a sponsor of this project, IDC program director Matt Lawton said,
Other sponsors include CollabNet, Holme Roberts & Owen, Navica, Olliance Group, the Open Solutions Alliance, the Open Source Business Foundation, O'Reilly Media, and Unisys
This project is based on a tool called OSS Discovery, which scans systems for known open-source projects and then anonymously submits the data to an OpenLogic database. The scan results will produce detailed, but anonymized reports that summarize the businesses own open-source usage and provide comparison data of other similar companies. OpenLogic are allowing businesses to access these results on an ongoing basis to encourage reluctant companies to contribute their data. Currently, OSS Discovery and the aggregate results are available from the Open Source Census Web site. But the census is still in its early stages. There are fewer than 100,000 open-source installations.
"The Open Source Census will provide the industry with much more granular information about where downloads are being installed, enabling both customers and IT solution providers to better understand the true impact that open-source software is having.”
Other sponsors include CollabNet, Holme Roberts & Owen, Navica, Olliance Group, the Open Solutions Alliance, the Open Source Business Foundation, O'Reilly Media, and Unisys
This project is based on a tool called OSS Discovery, which scans systems for known open-source projects and then anonymously submits the data to an OpenLogic database. The scan results will produce detailed, but anonymized reports that summarize the businesses own open-source usage and provide comparison data of other similar companies. OpenLogic are allowing businesses to access these results on an ongoing basis to encourage reluctant companies to contribute their data. Currently, OSS Discovery and the aggregate results are available from the Open Source Census Web site. But the census is still in its early stages. There are fewer than 100,000 open-source installations.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Will all software go online?
Yesterday's WSJ noted that Microsoft will experiment with a subscription model for some of its consumer software suites like Office, allowing consumers to pay an as-yet undetermined fee for access to the applications that includes automatic downloads of new versions. This move comes as consumer frustration rises over the need to keep track of product updates and to purchase and download new versions. It is likely also a reaction to Google and a few other players offering free online versions of their own word processing, spreadsheet, and presentation software to consumers.
This reminded me of a column I read about a week ago detailing one man's attempt to test the concept that "the Internet is rendering desktop software obsolete." He spent a week using only online applications -- nothing downloaded to his local machine (exceptions were made for FireFox and his Blackberry). It was quite a funny article, but offers some serious food for thought on the direction that the market for software will take. Judging by his experience, we still have a ways to go before all software is served online:
This reminded me of a column I read about a week ago detailing one man's attempt to test the concept that "the Internet is rendering desktop software obsolete." He spent a week using only online applications -- nothing downloaded to his local machine (exceptions were made for FireFox and his Blackberry). It was quite a funny article, but offers some serious food for thought on the direction that the market for software will take. Judging by his experience, we still have a ways to go before all software is served online:
For the most part, I had abandoned Outlook Web Access by the end of the week. Instead of cleaning out my inbox via BlackBerry every morning, I did this several times a day. I set my BlackBerry to vibrate and resorted to using it for nearly all my email. That's where things were on Thursday, when another editor walked by my desk and found me hunched over my BlackBerry, thumbs sore and eyes straining.
"How's the connected-only life?" he asked.
I wanted to vent about every little inconvenience I'd encountered, from sluggish email to disappearing spreadsheets. But after a week of BlackBerry conversations, I had learned to be succinct.
"Not great," I said.
Perhaps more interesting than his frustrations were his successes. For the most part, writing, sharing, editing, and spreadsheeting were possible using online-only applications. As free programs like these improve and proliferate, it will be fascinating to see what happens to pricing for software. Will Microsoft be brought to a place where it has to drastically cut or eliminate prices, or will all of the freeware developers start to charge for access? What will the world look like when we no longer have applications on our desktops? Is such a world possible? I think it is. Where will Microsoft and Google be when that happens?
Friday, April 18, 2008
Clickable Video is Here!
Check out this site Videoclix to see this new emerging media channel of clickable video. These video clips allow interactive Hypervideo which allows the views to click on anything that is tagged in the clip for more information. The way this can be monetized is by using product placement (which is an old way of advertising in video) with Hypervideo tags leading to the websites (and getting paid through affiliate marketing). Found this article on Mashable talking about this online show called DiggNation and how they monetized on this new media. Basiclly the show is these two guys who sit around with their laptops and talk about cool and interesting Digg stories. The Cool thing about the show is that any item on the screen is tagged and you can click for more information. So if you like the Red Dell Computer that they are in front of them, you can click on it to find out more, and then link to the BestBuy website to purchase one. You like the Jeans that they wearing or the sweat shirt click more and get links to Macys or American Apparel. Even the back drop links to the Hotel in Amsterdam they were and sends you to the lonely planet website.
This may be the future of how to actually make real money off independent produced content on the web. We will see where it goes.
Facebook to crack crime?
On nytimes.com today, an article reports that The Greater Manchester Police force (GMP) has created a Facebook application to help them get leads on investigations, making them the first
This is how it works: the application delivers real-time mini feeds of police news, local news and appeals for information. If a user wants to submit any information, there is a “Submit Intelligence” link that he or she clicks on, which will take him or her directly to the police website. All leads can be submitted anonymously.
To encourage leads, a content feature is placed next to that feed that allows users to post comments or share a particular story with other friends in their network. There are also links that lead to videos on GMP, YouTube and others featuring ongoing investigations, police force information, and other advisories. For example, one video showed a “closed-circuit TV footage of two men in hooded sweatshirts seen near the place where a 15-year-old, Jessie James, was shot and killed in
According to GMP, this application has been well received (750 people have placed it on their profile). They estimate that 7 million of the 59 million Facebook users are based in the
This is an example of the capability of social networking sites and how online communities can be mobilized. But nowhere in the article does it mention the potential for false leads from users and if or how GMP plans to handle them. I’m also curious to know how anonymous the user identity can be should the GMP need a real-life witness for prosecution. Another thing to think about is that the success of this may lead the way for other law enforcements around the world to do the same. Also, what if law enforcements start checking social networking sites for criminal activities similar to recruiters doing backgrounds checks? It may seem far-fetched now, but with online videos of teenage beatings and the like, could (should) police officers use them as a source?
Monetizing Social Networks: wired critiques Google's handling of the MySpace deal
An article posted today on wired.com criticizes Google's attempt to monetize social networking on MySpace:
How Google Has Screwed Up the MySpace Deal
The article cites Google's deal with the number on social networking site which allows Google to serve ads on the site through 2010, while agreeing to share-revenue with MySpace to the tune of $900 million. However, Google has to pay up regardless of whether it is able to meet its minimum ad goals.
However, given the uncharted and largely untested nature of advertising through social networking sites, some don't believe that simply offering ads alongside 'related' user-generated content will be particularly valuable to advertisers:
Instead, Andy Monfried, formerly of Advertising.com and now CEO of Lotame, suggests that the best way to capitalize on social networks is to identify those who hold the most sway in the online world.
This model seems reminiscent of Facebook's Social Ads feature, but rather than simply targeting users through friends (i.e. turning peer pressure into ad money), such a system seems to indicate that it would weight users' value as advertising conduits based on the position they hold in the network.
In the article "Social Networks and Group Formation" (in boxes and arrows, available in coursebook), the author notes that social network members can be characterized by their degree (the number of users they are connected to), control (the extent to which others depend on a node for information flow/connections to other nodes), and independence (the extent to which a node is closely related to other nodes considered, such "that it is minimally dependent on any single node." Perhaps by algorithimically identifying those nodes with the greatest degree and/or centrality, Monfried and Lotame can inject value into social networking ads.
However, the article doesn't address the potential problems with targeted advertising in social networks. As Facebook discovered with its launch of Beacon, users are not always thrilled to have their activity tracked and used for advertising purposes. Moreover, how would some users feel about being the particular focus of such advertising techniques? How do you capitalize on a users' degree or centrality without compromising that users' experience on the social networking site? With facebook we now see that users have the ability to opt out of such advertising schemes... does Lotame's model hold up if the networking site decides to relinquish control?
To be fair, Lotame is currently only working with smaller niche networks, not the big three. Perhaps it is easier to integrate advertising more seamlessly when users are less diverse and less numerous.
Still, the article makes a good point: Social networking is not search, and Google would be wrong to blindly follow its search-based ad model. Facebook's Social Ads claims to be able to reach users "before they search". I'm not sure networking is in any real way antecedent to search, but it is most definitely different... and it seems likely Google will realize this as it navigates its ad deal with MySpace:
How Google Has Screwed Up the MySpace Deal
The article cites Google's deal with the number on social networking site which allows Google to serve ads on the site through 2010, while agreeing to share-revenue with MySpace to the tune of $900 million. However, Google has to pay up regardless of whether it is able to meet its minimum ad goals.
However, given the uncharted and largely untested nature of advertising through social networking sites, some don't believe that simply offering ads alongside 'related' user-generated content will be particularly valuable to advertisers:
"You can't put up contextual ads against user-generated content," Monfried says. "It's irrelevant, and advertisers don't want to risk their brands on user-generated content."
Instead, Andy Monfried, formerly of Advertising.com and now CEO of Lotame, suggests that the best way to capitalize on social networks is to identify those who hold the most sway in the online world.
Monfried says Lotame dramatically improves targeting for advertisers by doing things such as identifying the "influencers." Monfried was reluctant to disclose too many details on how Lotame's solution varies from Google's ad-targeting platform, but says his company is focused on "verbs and actions." So instead of serving ads based on the text in users' profiles, Lotame focuses on users' actions and demographic data...
This model seems reminiscent of Facebook's Social Ads feature, but rather than simply targeting users through friends (i.e. turning peer pressure into ad money), such a system seems to indicate that it would weight users' value as advertising conduits based on the position they hold in the network.
In the article "Social Networks and Group Formation" (in boxes and arrows, available in coursebook), the author notes that social network members can be characterized by their degree (the number of users they are connected to), control (the extent to which others depend on a node for information flow/connections to other nodes), and independence (the extent to which a node is closely related to other nodes considered, such "that it is minimally dependent on any single node." Perhaps by algorithimically identifying those nodes with the greatest degree and/or centrality, Monfried and Lotame can inject value into social networking ads.
However, the article doesn't address the potential problems with targeted advertising in social networks. As Facebook discovered with its launch of Beacon, users are not always thrilled to have their activity tracked and used for advertising purposes. Moreover, how would some users feel about being the particular focus of such advertising techniques? How do you capitalize on a users' degree or centrality without compromising that users' experience on the social networking site? With facebook we now see that users have the ability to opt out of such advertising schemes... does Lotame's model hold up if the networking site decides to relinquish control?
To be fair, Lotame is currently only working with smaller niche networks, not the big three. Perhaps it is easier to integrate advertising more seamlessly when users are less diverse and less numerous.
Still, the article makes a good point: Social networking is not search, and Google would be wrong to blindly follow its search-based ad model. Facebook's Social Ads claims to be able to reach users "before they search". I'm not sure networking is in any real way antecedent to search, but it is most definitely different... and it seems likely Google will realize this as it navigates its ad deal with MySpace:
"Google does a great job of monetizing intent," says Ray Valdes, an analyst at Gartner Research. "It knows what I'm searching for and it can show me relevant ads. But social networks are not about intent."
Valdes argues that its unfair to slam Google's approach -- after all, the company's core business is search, not social media. And to be fair, Google said on yesterday's earnings conference call that they're trying new things -- including demographic targeting -- and that they've seen some progress.
The Long Tail of Journalism: Integrating blogging into mainstream news sources
Ran across this article on CNN this morning.
Blog brings human face to big-city murder
For about an hour it got top billing on CNN's website (for those who don't visit, CNN.com runs major headlines at the top of it's site, with one article in particular highlighted in a box with a picture).
I think this article indicates some advantages blogs offer over print news, while its featured status on CNN.com and its integration into a major local newspaper (a major traditional news website) alludes to the mainstreaming of the blog into popular consumption of reports on current events.
The article discusses The Homicide Report, a blog published online by the LATimes. The blog itself reports on all homicides in LA County... a task that the constraints of print media would make impossible.
The article notes that the impact of this comprehensive reporting style is markedly different (and more democratic) than the pick and choose what sells nature of traditional reporting... in this way blogs capture the long tail of news stories that would otherwise go unpublished. Furthermore, the comprehensive nature of the data collection has other advantages... for example, "The Homicide Report tries to answer questions such as, "Are there fewer homicides when it rains?" (Maybe). It also includes the names of suspects shot to death by police."
It seems possible that the integration of the blogs into the online face of mainstream news media has several advantages. For one, it allows major news providers a way to grow and compete in the online space (it seems encouraging that such companies are investing in bolstering their online content rather than making their web front a carbon copy of their print media). Additionally, an unlimited web space does not imply that all information is created equal, and as we have seen it can be hard for consumers to sift through the multitudes of blogs in order to extract the most accurate, relevant, and high quality information. By marrying the brand equity and reliability of major news sources with the limitless blog domain, it seems that the giants of print media may be able to leverage their name into more eyeballs on their blogs.
However, it should also be noted that this blog is published by a paid LA Times reporter, and for the news media to truly compete, they need to find a way to allow their blogs to grow organically, without maintaining a paid staff of bloggers. But with the obvious willingness of citizen journalists to blog, and the value of incorporation into a branded news streams, such a task does not seem impossible.
Blog brings human face to big-city murder
For about an hour it got top billing on CNN's website (for those who don't visit, CNN.com runs major headlines at the top of it's site, with one article in particular highlighted in a box with a picture).
I think this article indicates some advantages blogs offer over print news, while its featured status on CNN.com and its integration into a major local newspaper (a major traditional news website) alludes to the mainstreaming of the blog into popular consumption of reports on current events.
The article discusses The Homicide Report, a blog published online by the LATimes. The blog itself reports on all homicides in LA County... a task that the constraints of print media would make impossible.
Like most big-city newspapers, the one Leovy works for -- The Los Angeles Times -- reports only the most "newsworthy" cases. But those killings, elementary school drive-bys and celebrity murders only account for 10 percent of the county's homicides, Leovy found.
She wanted to go deeper, to put a human face on the toll homicide was taking, particularly in L.A.'s black and Latino communities.
"The Web offered what the paper did not: unlimited space," Leovy wrote in a front-page story summarizing her year as creator and the first blogger for The Homicide Report.
The article notes that the impact of this comprehensive reporting style is markedly different (and more democratic) than the pick and choose what sells nature of traditional reporting... in this way blogs capture the long tail of news stories that would otherwise go unpublished. Furthermore, the comprehensive nature of the data collection has other advantages... for example, "The Homicide Report tries to answer questions such as, "Are there fewer homicides when it rains?" (Maybe). It also includes the names of suspects shot to death by police."
It seems possible that the integration of the blogs into the online face of mainstream news media has several advantages. For one, it allows major news providers a way to grow and compete in the online space (it seems encouraging that such companies are investing in bolstering their online content rather than making their web front a carbon copy of their print media). Additionally, an unlimited web space does not imply that all information is created equal, and as we have seen it can be hard for consumers to sift through the multitudes of blogs in order to extract the most accurate, relevant, and high quality information. By marrying the brand equity and reliability of major news sources with the limitless blog domain, it seems that the giants of print media may be able to leverage their name into more eyeballs on their blogs.
However, it should also be noted that this blog is published by a paid LA Times reporter, and for the news media to truly compete, they need to find a way to allow their blogs to grow organically, without maintaining a paid staff of bloggers. But with the obvious willingness of citizen journalists to blog, and the value of incorporation into a branded news streams, such a task does not seem impossible.
"Surviving High School" The Mobile Game and its Marketing Potential
http://adage.com/madisonandvine/article?article_id=126445
In Ad Age today there was an article that discusses "Surviving High School", a new mobile-gaming that allows users to choose playing jocks, nerds and other iconic high school stereotypes through a script that is expanded with weekly episodic content. The game has already been downloaded more than a million times, with an additional 6.5 million episodic downloads. Users download new content each week, and then get deeper and deeper into the game. The games popularity has already inspired Facebook Groups and other discussion forums. Currently, the game is not supported by advertising... but could it be soon! imagine the potential.
Right now, according to the most recent Nielsen Mobile data study , 90% of mobile phone owners felt ad placements on their devices were unacceptable. But along the same lines, the article states that gamers may not mind and even welcome ads as long as it does not interrupt the gaming experience. Gamers would also be concerned that the advertising matches the brand of the game. There are so many possibilities when it comes to High School brand!
A first attempt at marketing was successful: Vivendi created a MySpace page for the game, and anyone who added it to their top eight friends were eligible in a sweepstakes to win a Motorola Razr phone, as well as have their likeness digitally reproduced and introduced into the next episodic content as a character. The game had 10,000 friends in just a couple of days. This shows the network effect and the power of mass use. This sweepstakes would have never been possible with out the "word of mouth"/everyone is on so I must be too effect.
One of the major problems with mobile marketing is that there are so many different models. Each ad needs to be formatted to fit the Verizon phones, Sprint, t-mobile, iPhone... and so on. Is the cost worth the benefit of advertising?
The other issue with advertising in the game is that currently users pay to play. Makers of the game are wary about subjecting users to advertising. This goes back to the issue of how much are people willing to take- advertising is not effective if people are annoyed by it.
However the success of the "Surviving High School" game and the number of downloads has peaked marketers interest. "'Surviving High School' won't open the floodgates of advertisers on mobile gaming," Mr. Mytides said, "but it's a step in the right direction, in the same way that Second Life wasn't the best thing for in-game advertising, but still opened their eyes to the possibilities."
Could we start receiving pop up ads on our phones? With multi-functional phones like the iPhone this could be a strong possibility.
In Ad Age today there was an article that discusses "Surviving High School", a new mobile-gaming that allows users to choose playing jocks, nerds and other iconic high school stereotypes through a script that is expanded with weekly episodic content. The game has already been downloaded more than a million times, with an additional 6.5 million episodic downloads. Users download new content each week, and then get deeper and deeper into the game. The games popularity has already inspired Facebook Groups and other discussion forums. Currently, the game is not supported by advertising... but could it be soon! imagine the potential.
Right now, according to the most recent Nielsen Mobile data study , 90% of mobile phone owners felt ad placements on their devices were unacceptable. But along the same lines, the article states that gamers may not mind and even welcome ads as long as it does not interrupt the gaming experience. Gamers would also be concerned that the advertising matches the brand of the game. There are so many possibilities when it comes to High School brand!
A first attempt at marketing was successful: Vivendi created a MySpace page for the game, and anyone who added it to their top eight friends were eligible in a sweepstakes to win a Motorola Razr phone, as well as have their likeness digitally reproduced and introduced into the next episodic content as a character. The game had 10,000 friends in just a couple of days. This shows the network effect and the power of mass use. This sweepstakes would have never been possible with out the "word of mouth"/everyone is on so I must be too effect.
One of the major problems with mobile marketing is that there are so many different models. Each ad needs to be formatted to fit the Verizon phones, Sprint, t-mobile, iPhone... and so on. Is the cost worth the benefit of advertising?
The other issue with advertising in the game is that currently users pay to play. Makers of the game are wary about subjecting users to advertising. This goes back to the issue of how much are people willing to take- advertising is not effective if people are annoyed by it.
However the success of the "Surviving High School" game and the number of downloads has peaked marketers interest. "'Surviving High School' won't open the floodgates of advertisers on mobile gaming," Mr. Mytides said, "but it's a step in the right direction, in the same way that Second Life wasn't the best thing for in-game advertising, but still opened their eyes to the possibilities."
Could we start receiving pop up ads on our phones? With multi-functional phones like the iPhone this could be a strong possibility.
Seatguru and Google to buy Expedia?
Another good example of product differentiation in the online travel industry, that was not mention in class, is Seatguru.com. The website, created in 2001 around the idea of providing information on what is the best seat to choose in any given flight, relies mostly on users review to gather its information. Much like the UMG model Tripadvisor has. No wonder, Seatguru was purchased last year by Tripadvisor (which, by the way, is part of Expedia) in what I believe is a smart move and I guess our last guest speaker would agree with me as it ties perfectly with his “third rule of success in the internet:” work with your complements!
Expedia with Hotels.com, Hotwire and Tripadvisor bets on covering a wide variety of customers targeting each of their businesses to different customer segments and so far it has worked for them.
On the last days rumors (see link below) have spread about a potential buyout by Google (who else?!). Travel seems a natural area for Google to land on as it expands its platform and Expedia could be a good fit for them. What remains a question is to what degree could Google extract more value from this lucrative industry to make sense of this deal. How would competitors of Expedia advertising on Google react to this buyout? Would pulling off advertising from Google be a smart move for the competition? Where else would they get that traffic?
http://www.feedthebull.com/content/google-acquisition-rumor-mill-working-overtime
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Child Advocates vs. Online Marketers
According to a recent LA Times article, a coalition of child advocates and medical groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Assn., asked the FTC to set up guidelines that would prevent Internet companies, especially social networks (i.e. Facebook and MySpace) from marketing products to minors through “behavioral targeting,” which includes profiling interests and tracking online behavioral patterns. Their concern is that large online ad companies are consolidating their users’ data and providing this information to marketers. In turn, marketers are customizing their ads to reach minors without the minors’ consent and ability to fully understand what is being sold to them:
Their rationale is if the FCC can restrict the content and amount of TV commercials that target minors, than the FTC should take responsibility to restrict “interactive ad systems” from collecting sensitive information from minors. In fact, the Network Advertising Initiative, which is backed by Google, AOL, Yahoo!, and Microsoft, is considering barring use of some medical information if the data can be linked to personal identifiers.
I thought this was interesting for a couple of reasons. First, minors are one of the largest groups of online users and worth billions of dollars to marketers. It would be difficult for marketers to let go of this cash cow. Second, with the possible acquisition of Yahoo, there is real concern over the consolidated control over user data and the use of this data to get ad revenue. As discussed in class, there are potential privacy issues. But most importantly, this may set new precedent for how to use online content and media.
http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-fi-kidsonline12apr12,1,6408934.story
"New ad networks appear to be using . . . traffic data for behavioral advertising without proper safeguards or user consent," the Center for Democracy and Technology and two other groups wrote. "No regulation or self-regulation exists to address the privacy implications of this new model."
Their rationale is if the FCC can restrict the content and amount of TV commercials that target minors, than the FTC should take responsibility to restrict “interactive ad systems” from collecting sensitive information from minors. In fact, the Network Advertising Initiative, which is backed by Google, AOL, Yahoo!, and Microsoft, is considering barring use of some medical information if the data can be linked to personal identifiers.
I thought this was interesting for a couple of reasons. First, minors are one of the largest groups of online users and worth billions of dollars to marketers. It would be difficult for marketers to let go of this cash cow. Second, with the possible acquisition of Yahoo, there is real concern over the consolidated control over user data and the use of this data to get ad revenue. As discussed in class, there are potential privacy issues. But most importantly, this may set new precedent for how to use online content and media.
http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-fi-kidsonline12apr12,1,6408934.story
More Privacy Backlash Concerns
According to techcruch, Blockbuster just got sued for privacy violations related to its Beacon ads through Facebook.
This particular lawsuit is due to a potential violation of the video tape privacy act, which prohibits sharing of customer information, but could be emblematic of future problems where regulatory legislation from off-line business begins to restrict online activities. I could see similar problems with information related to financial or health activities.
This type of lawsuits may also spook brand advertisers who work in highly regulated industries or industries where privacy is of concern to consumers.
Medical advertising on WebMD (providing information or offending users)
I also read the article on Google/Microsoft and your Health Records a couple days ago and was very shocked by the idea of Google or Microsoft having some control/management of one's medical records. After reading this article I was curious about medical advertising on the web- this led me to WebMD (which I admit I am a frequent user and I wonder what info they have gathered on me)
WebMD, a website that is a medical and wellness information service, primarily known for its public Internet site, which provides health information, a symptom checklist, pharmacy information, blogs of physicians with specific topics and a place to store personal medical information. In an article posted on their site , http://www.webmd.com/content/article/105/107785.htm, WebMD discusses problems and issues with its advertising.
WebMD, unlike other medical information , WebMD is not funded and controlled by the government, a university, or a health association, nor does it charge users a subscription fee. Therefore its business model is advertising! the article listed above is a response from WebMD to a complaint filed by a nurse that was very offended by an advertisement for Baby Formula that popped up while viewing an article on Breastfeeding. She thought this was inappropriate.
Additionally, there are many sensitive issues that WebMD must consider when placing their advertisements- WebMD is in fact mindful of such concerns. The company compiles a list of "sensitive" topics such as mental retardation, suicide, and childhood genetic diseases, next to which certain advertising is off limits. For instance, ads about weight loss plans aren't run next to articles about eating disorders or cancer; ads about fertility treatments don't appear alongside information about miscarriage.
This consideration is very interesting and important. Without these considerations, WebMD's entire business model could be in jeopardy (advertisers want to reach potential users but do not want to alienate people). However what offends one person can vary from person to person. How does WebMD determine the limits?
WebMD's advertising policy states it "will not accept advertising that, in WebMD's opinion, is not factually accurate and in good taste." Who determines this? Again people can offended by some many different things concerning medical issues.
Additionally, WebMD users reported annoyance with the ads. We have spoken about peoples tolerance for online advertising a lot in class, this speaks directly to that. One user reported that "while trying to read your interesting article on exercise and diabetes, I was annoyed and distracted by an ad for an insulin pump that would not close." Said yet another: "This site went from an informative site to another site designed to promote and sell products."
If WebMD's model is advertising- and their advertisements are offending and annoying their users, how beneficial will this model continue to be? Will this business model come back to haunt them. WebMD responds in the article with "We live in a society that constantly bombards us with advertising, whether we're watching TV, surfing the web, listening to the radio, riding elevators, or shopping in stores. Holding WebMD to a different standard seems unreasonable" Interesting...
This really makes me question - is a site there to provide real information to users or to make money? (we all kPublish Postnow money is an incentive but makes you think)
WebMD, a website that is a medical and wellness information service, primarily known for its public Internet site, which provides health information, a symptom checklist, pharmacy information, blogs of physicians with specific topics and a place to store personal medical information. In an article posted on their site , http://www.webmd.com/content/article/105/107785.htm, WebMD discusses problems and issues with its advertising.
WebMD, unlike other medical information , WebMD is not funded and controlled by the government, a university, or a health association, nor does it charge users a subscription fee. Therefore its business model is advertising! the article listed above is a response from WebMD to a complaint filed by a nurse that was very offended by an advertisement for Baby Formula that popped up while viewing an article on Breastfeeding. She thought this was inappropriate.
Additionally, there are many sensitive issues that WebMD must consider when placing their advertisements- WebMD is in fact mindful of such concerns. The company compiles a list of "sensitive" topics such as mental retardation, suicide, and childhood genetic diseases, next to which certain advertising is off limits. For instance, ads about weight loss plans aren't run next to articles about eating disorders or cancer; ads about fertility treatments don't appear alongside information about miscarriage.
This consideration is very interesting and important. Without these considerations, WebMD's entire business model could be in jeopardy (advertisers want to reach potential users but do not want to alienate people). However what offends one person can vary from person to person. How does WebMD determine the limits?
WebMD's advertising policy states it "will not accept advertising that, in WebMD's opinion, is not factually accurate and in good taste." Who determines this? Again people can offended by some many different things concerning medical issues.
Additionally, WebMD users reported annoyance with the ads. We have spoken about peoples tolerance for online advertising a lot in class, this speaks directly to that. One user reported that "while trying to read your interesting article on exercise and diabetes, I was annoyed and distracted by an ad for an insulin pump that would not close." Said yet another: "This site went from an informative site to another site designed to promote and sell products."
If WebMD's model is advertising- and their advertisements are offending and annoying their users, how beneficial will this model continue to be? Will this business model come back to haunt them. WebMD responds in the article with "We live in a society that constantly bombards us with advertising, whether we're watching TV, surfing the web, listening to the radio, riding elevators, or shopping in stores. Holding WebMD to a different standard seems unreasonable" Interesting...
This really makes me question - is a site there to provide real information to users or to make money? (we all kPublish Postnow money is an incentive but makes you think)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)