Marketing quote of the day February 27, 2009Posted by David Gillespie in marketing, technology, web 2.0.
There’s always so much written about how social norms can go out the window when the anonymity of the web or even the simple removal of a human face takes over. I believe it’s a temporary state though, and as much as I am loathe to admit it, I think the rise of Facebook has done more to bring about social change over the web than any other service, placing a premium back on the connections we really do have, versus say MySpace, Friendster, or whatever came before which was mass convergency at the expense of intimacy.
Of course lots of people still choose to use Facebook in that manner, personally I like to keep things a little more closed. But I think we’re just about past the idea that what is appropriate social behaviour somehow differs face to face versus online. What we do to the web – or on it – we do to ourselves, and when we reduce the connections we have down to a series of contact details and earning potential, we get nothing more than that in return.
Maramushi Newsmap January 21, 2009Posted by David Gillespie in web 2.0.
Tags: Google, Maramushi
Serious case of ❤ going on here. Srsly.
Maramushi’s Newsmap takes news feeds from Google News and creates a visualisation based on the popularity of stories. It updates on the fly as news breaks with the tiles linking to the unabridged stories. Great for a snap-shot of what is going on in the world, even better for those far from home who want a quick over view of what is happening…about as much as ever it would appear.
Calling Social Media Out November 13, 2008Posted by David Gillespie in philosophy, web 2.0, work/life.
Tags: Adspace Pioneers, compfight, Creative Commons, De Pasquale, del.icio.us, flickr, Julian Cole, last.fm, Matt Granfield, MySpace, Pandora, web 2.0
I’ve had enough. I’m done with social media and I’m calling you, you and particularly YOU out on it. I’m nailing it to the wall for the crock that it is. UGC was the first to cop it, social media is next.
I’m looking at what Jules is doing with The Population, my friend Matt‘s work with DP Dialogue, whoever else is out there. Yes, we have the Beersphere tonight, yes I blog, vlog, put music on MySpace, I comment, bookmark with del.icio.us, I use compfight to search Flickr for Creative Commons-licensed imagery, I discover new music via Last.fm and Pandora, and I Twitter. I do all that, and I’m telling you right now social media will be, in the great history of the web, hell in the great history of the next three years (if that long), the 2.0 equivalent of Pets.com.
And here is why.
First, we have to agree on something. You can choose to disagree, and I welcome that, but my stance is this: the web is inherently social. Not for everyone, particularly not for older generations, but from me back to the babies it is inherently, indiscriminately, and unavoidably social.
Next, we have to agree that the web is young. The web is still figuring out what it is, what it wants to be. You know movies? The name comes, need I remind you, from moving pictures. Photos that seemed to come to life, truth 24 times a second. Web 1.0 was moving pictures, we’re now in the Talkies. Imagine if film had stalled when talkies came along and we suddenly found the actors had horrible voices?
That is where we are; social media is “the talkies” of the Internet.
Social media isn’t anything special, it is just the Internet in its current form. All media is social – Julian says this himself. It is a period that will forever be known as a time where it became as easy to create content as it was to consume it. THAT is the important part of what is going on.
Not Web 2.0, not new media, not digital media, not post-media and certainly not social media. If all media is social, media must be inherently social and if we agree the web is inherently social then the Internet is, my friends, just a collection of media (we need to separate that idea from the business of media). We have created a new taxonomy in an attempt to somehow describe the “otherness” of this new space, which is itself not a recent development; we’ve separated movies and TV for years even though they showed us essentially the same thing (like FM radio and do now). Watching video online is no different, and soon we won’t treat it like it is.
In fact, thank God (or Dawkins for the atheists) we’re rapidly coming back around to a place where we’re not stuck on discussions of platforms and mediums; there will only be one platform where everyone produces and, once again, content will be king. That platform is the Internet, and, dear client folk, if someone comes to you with a digital strategy that does not have a focus on creating 1-to-1 connections in your audience, then run for the hills. But do not be caught up in the myth of social media, that is just the interwebs as we know it.
Now, let’s talk about something interesting for a change.
**Update** I got the name of Matt’s social media company wrong as he points out below. Apologies to him and the good people at De Pasquale.
New businesses reside in the linked economy November 11, 2008Posted by David Gillespie in business strategy, creativity, intent, strategy, technology, web 2.0.
Tags: Doc Searls, flickr, Jeff Jarvis, MySpace, Threadless, YouTube
Image via Wikipedia
I spend a lot of time with friends thinking about where tomorrow’s businesses lie, and I’m on the record that great content with good intentions and an open philosophy will be at the heart of the real money-makers in the next decade.
With that in mind, I’ve just read a fascinating post from Mark Ury who is an Experience Architect at Blast Radius. Mark ties together a few loose strands of thinking and comes out with something entirely his own. I particularly love the below principles he borrows from Jeff Jarvis…
Can applying “link economy” strategies work for “traditional” companies? Here are Jeff Jarvis’ four principles. And below is a modified version, applied to companies in pursuit of innovation:
1. All companies must be transparent. Your talent base and IP must be exposed and connected. They’re not useable unless they’re linked.
2. The recipient of IP and talent is the party responsible for monetizing them. The more you enable the flow of IP and talent AWAY from you, the more it comes BACK—with greater value and skills to monetize. Just watch how Hollywood operates.
3. A porous organization is the key to efficiency. In other words: do what you do best and link to the rest.
4. There are opportunities to add value atop the IP and talent layer. This is where one can find business opportunities: by managing abundance rather than the old model of managing scarcity. The market needs help finding the good stuff; that curation is a business opportunity.
…which he applies to Threadless during the course of the post…
The result: a business that manages abundance (t-shirt ideas), provides value through transparency (the audience becomes both editor and consumer), and values the flow of IP and talent through them—rather than by them. (Doc Searls calls this kind of value “a shift from “making money with” to “making money because.”)
Great piece. And it contains some links to some other fascinating reads on “the linked economy”. Mark also takes the time to talk about opportunities that exist around monetising the aggregation of information and content, of which Threadless is a prime example (as is Flickr, YouTube, MySpace etc.).
The idea here is this: find the verticles in seemingly well-mined markets, and you will open up doors the rest of us never knew existed.