Jul 162008
 

Interesting. I have a screen here at work spiting out various random on the spot blog posts from the Future of Media Summit . Looking at the themes and points coming out forcibly takes me back to the mid to late 90s and even earlier. At today’s conference there is lots of discussion about how media is fragmenting, democratization of distribution, how personalization (your personal media cloud) is really where it’s at, the live web and a plethora of points about how video on the web has erm, generated a new advertising model. Yawn. Now I remember why I avoid ‘Future of…” conferences…

Seems all I have read from the Future Exploration Networks innovative and ground breaking (video link up – really, a video conference link…I did one of those in 96?!) between Sydney and San Francisco are not really exploring the future but each others guess as to what is really happening at the moment – cause no one really has a clue. It is deja vu, a recap of many European/Far East versions of the future from 10-15 years ago. In fact looking at most of my presentations and posts from years ago on this and other blogs cover most of the points, especially about personalised media (oh yes thats the title). For example Ross Dawson’s‚ future of media topics I covered in presentations circa 1999 – a few recents are in my slideshare group which I rarely promote or on this PDF page which has some earlier ones and notably in this fun view of 2009 I did in Perth back in 2000 (compare the two). First here is oft self-promoted Ross Dawson’s vision of what is shaping the Future of Media…

Ross Dawson 2008

Media and entertainment industries growing massively. Seven driving forces shaping media

  1. Increasing media consumption – ‘we want to swim in an ocean of media all the time’
  2. Fragmentation – proliferation of new channels (mobile, video, etc)
  3. Participation – people sharing their stories
  4. Personalisation – of content & advertising, issues with privacy
  5. New revenue models – advertising networks
  6. Generational change – younger people becoming dominant in marketplace
  7. Increasing bandwidth – shifting what is currently being delivered over other channels > iPhone mania

Personal Cloud – content we own and create – From this rains down the ‘precipitation of participation’ – sharing our photos, stories and lives with others – To what extent do we control our Personal Cloud?

Yes these are and have been shaping the future of media for the past 15 years at least – and then 2) my slightly cheeky predictions…drum roll…Future of Media in 2009 (from 2000’s Small Screen Big Picture)

Gary Hayes 2000

The World in 2009

  • Every individual can become a producer of content which is available to everyone else – if they want it.
  • Now anything is available on demand from anywhere over vast broadband networks.
  • Everything is ‘pulled’, only personally relevant content is ‘pushed’.
  • Everything can be made portable & kept forever
  • The home becomes a personalised entertainment and life system where everything is centralised – games, video, shops, audio, text, email & vmail & banking.
  • CD collections, home movies, personal photographs are stored here too
  • ‘Open Standards’ killed off all proprietary platforms in 2005 and the large ‘trusted’ traditional broadcasters collaborated and produced one navigation system that all companies adopted
  • All ‘content programme brands’ have elements in all of the above
  • The words ‘TV’ ‘radio’ & ‘internet’ disappeared from our vocabulary. Even the word ‘interactive’ went – everything is now interactive
  • The World Wide Web of early 2000 is regarded as a ‘low resolution’ pilot
  • Scheduled ‘live video’ becomes a special group shared event – there is only one broadcast channel in each country – these events generate most online discussion
  • True to all predictions the ‘interactive’ fridge becomes the most popular, connected device in the house

OK as with all “Future of Media” conferences we come to expect lots of waffle, fluffy guesses as to where Social Media or New Gadgets (iPhone, yawn) will really take us. Most talks I did for TV-Anytime and BBC around 2000-2003 covers most of the discussion around future of privacy, targeted ads and personal content systems. But bottom line it really it is about paranoia on the part of traditional media makers able to afford turning to high fee ‘futurist’ consultants who rarely produce anything apart from a ‘compelling’ stage presence and a book or two to sell. OK I am possibly being cruel but if the content industry is going to grow up it should stop looking for shiny jewels from crystal ball gazing, web trawling, big picture, space cadets and look to hands-on strategists who live and breathe this stuff. Most of the former are jumping on any myth/hype they can use to leverage interest in their ‘expertise’ but it is rarely about the future and often about regurgitating the past within the boundaries of this fresh new high bandwidth, on-demand, two way network. I have talked long and hard in the past about the separation between commentators and producers around cross-media and I have also pointed out academia needs to up its game. I don’t bother to win friends, as you can tell.

Unlike several folk at the Future of Media conference I rarely self-promote as being worthy of title of visionary (and any one up pens their own websites with those words in the title should be seriously steered clear of). But to be like them I thought I would throw in a bunch of my own quotes I normally pull out for wall stickers on LAMP courses: (Some others here)

“If you are not passionate about the empowerment potential of your interactive creation or find something new in it yourself at every turn, you should not call yourself an interactive producer” Gary Hayes 2005

“True interactivity should require users to give something of themselves and for the ‘system’ to resonate with that. If all you ask them to put in is selecting a series of vacuous pre-built options, their engagement is minimal and all they will truly get out is a series of vacuous outcomes.” Gary Hayes 2005

“Over a 15 year, medium term broadband future terms such as Film, TV, Radio & the Internet will start to disappear from our next generation’s vocabulary. Audiences will interactively share & access video, audio and games across a sea of devices, partly oblivious of appointment-to-view in the 20th Century.” Gary Hayes – Snr Producer, BBC. 2000

“The ‘My Media Generation’ are experienced multitaskers. They are used to browsing, jumping between devices and physical locations. Services that do not integrate this in to the design will be lost in the noise. One must create story that permeates their world, playing with the fact that they are already enjoying self-induced, parallel experiences.” Gary Hayes 2005

“The future may be cross-media but it is also interactive multi-modal devices at home and on the move that connect to every source and every media type” Gary Hayes 2005

“Just as humans eventually were unable to tame the complexity and scale of the physical universe so it will be with our media universe. The only course of action will be to send personalised intelligent agents, reconnaissance drones, deep into the content cosmos to capture relevance. The personalized future will be a world where rich audio visual and game media orbits around the digital you – occasionally being sucked into your ‘realm’ like stars pulled by forces unknown into black holes” Gary Hayes, Space Cadet 2004

We are all guilty of Weasel Words when we are asked the ‘where is it all heading question’ but there are others who base their careers on them. Typical ones heard in many a consultation session, “Social Media has enormous implications, it will change the business forever” or how about “Video on the web will produce a sea change of advertising models” or “These social virtual browser based web worlds could be very important for your brand” – client: yes we guessed that, but please tell us how it will in detail, what we need to do to change, in detail and by the way, have you ‘lived’ our business.

But lets make this post interactive, which one are you hands-on strategist or space cadet weasel word waffler?

 

May 142008
 

Currently doing some talks about online buzz and the ‘network’ and thought I would share some of those cute charts I threw together to illustrate a few angles. Firstly though just wanted to get out there a simple view/evolutionary map of the track we are on, the out-of-control train without brakes hurtling towards an always-on, networked speck of cosmic dust, we call home. To warm you up before the here and now stuff, some simple jumps to illustrate this continuum (note: step 12 onwards gets a little space cadet! but you will see the link 🙂 –

  1. The dawn of man, the darkest age, little or no communication
  2. The age of non-verbal, small geographically challenged, tribal/family communities
  3. A common verbal language – communities expand, explore and spread ideas very slowly around the globe
  4. Stories, beliefs and knowledge shared slowly via printed material
  5. Life and ideas from one perspective captured on film and played back to many, delayed and editorialized by a select few
  6. Audio stories as opinions spread by a few, live, in real time, one to many via voice only broadcast, radio
  7. Live cameras connect to broadcast towers and satellites, the world focuses on few to many TV – they also plays stored media to increase stickiness
  8. Early copper internet starts to carry text, audio and grainy video, pushed at computer users – web 1.0
  9. Fiber and faster copper broadband gradually makes all stored content immediately available replacing TV and Radio while computers become mobile
  10. Communities form and connect globally albeit asynchronously, leaving ideas around the web to share and expand – web 2.0
  11. The web becomes more and more instantaneous as text, audio and video are always on, and crude virtual worlds for synchronous co-creative interaction – web 3.0
  12. A fork in the road – part of the world goes into vivid real time virtual spaces as fully rendered, photo realistic avatars, their physical bodies mapped in real time from their physical selves – web 4.0
  13. On the other fork mobile interfaces move from the hand driven mobiles to direct brain (thought) connection – everyone on the planet in real time can instantly communicate with everyone else via thought, prefacing the thought with recipient/s, name, friends, family, country, world and voila – web 5.0
  14. Humanity, connected as one consciousness, takes a leap forward to level 2

OK bit of a jump from Twitter to WiFi brain ‘thought chatter’ connectors between us all but you get the gist 🙂 Back to now, somewhere between 10 to 12 and a few slides I have been using alongside the web 2.0 myth image of last year and a few others to be blogged to help illustrate the wonderfully wacky sharing world of web 2.0.

Wonderful Web 2.0 © Gary Hayes 2008

The first diagram above shows the components of web 2.0 with axes of synch/asynch on the horizontal and one to many and many to many on the vertical axis – all of the components can be delivered to the four screens indicated on the top left. It is primarily intended to show that the blue (text/conversation) and purple (richer media) web 2.0 components are often combined to create a well rounded social network portal. The yellow blocks are messengers, digg and rss which act as glue and navigation.

This series of diagrams below, spheres of influence, below is a quick stab showing at a very high level (read: 101 for newbs) how web 2.0 services cause flocking, sharing and interconnectivity.

Here we have the people (ok my pic of Central Station in NY!), a friend and family core and ripples of connection/separation spiralling outwards.

A metaphoric web over the top – ideally a 3D diagram would make more sense but this suggests a network.

Connections are limited to one-to-one (eg: person to company or property) in a non-web 2.0 world

The addition of three example web 2.0 components of video and photo sharing plus combination social network shows how a flocking occurs as well as more interconnectivity stimulated through those portals. Obviously the components would be interconnected and overlap etc:

Showing how ‘you’ via your blogs, pod and vod casts, tweets, comments and ratings generate links to and from you. The more active you are the more you grow and strengthen the ‘neural’ connections.

A final diagram meant to illustrate the simple idea that once you are established as a micro web 2.0 component you generate specific links directly to you – likely to be niche interest.

Posted by Gary Hayes ©2008

Oct 222006
 

Still catching up with drafts and this one is more about my editing than my own crystal ball gazing. I love predictions about the way we will be interacting in the future especially when we are getting a little sniff of them in the present day, eg: web 3.0. So I selected, last month, some quotes/segments from the fantastic Pew Future of the Internet report from Sept 26 this year. The report made some assumptions and commentators responded, more in a moment.

Alternate Reality Personalizaton

As we hurtle towards the end of 2006 I think back to my measly predictions at the start of the year as to what would happen this year. I know it is only October but I am surprised how many are pretty close – especially developments in video on the web and viewer created content but as usual, premature on personalization, still! This was echoed in many of the notable folk below. Seems until we are completely swamped by content as to be comatosed will the demand for agents, targeting and personalization really kick in. Perhaps with 60% of all video (for example) on the web controlled by Google now, their personalization engine will start to trickle in under the radar of most people. Just before we go to Pew aggregated quotations, here is a quote (that falls in my space cadet camp) I did this time two years ago about our relentless stampede toward too much content.

“Just as humans eventually were unable to tame the complexity and scale of the physical universe so it will be with our media universe. The only course of action will be to send personalised intelligent agents, reconnaissance drones, deep into the content cosmos to capture relevance. The personalized future will be a world where rich audio visual and immersive game media orbits around the digital you – occasionally being sucked into your ‘realmÂ’ like stars pulled by forces unknown into black holes” – Gary Hayes, 2004

But enough about my near term predictions back to the future of 2020 with the Pew Futures doc (which is here in PDF by the way). I scanned the survey they did and found it a bit weak, most results were half/half and inconclusive but I found the plethora of future quotes far more interesting here is a selection of my favourites mostly in the AI/personalization and Virtual World/Alternate Reality future domains.

“This is the AI bogeyman. It’s always around 20 years away, whatever the year.” – Seth Finkelstein, Programmer and anti-censorship activist

“Simulations will develop to where some players’ experiences so closely mimic reality that the players will be stimulated with the same neurotransmitters that drive feelings of love and pleasure in the real world. There will be simulations as addictive as nicotine and cocaine, but without same degree of societal antipathy.” – Sean Mead, a technology consultant

“There is a strong likelihood that virtual reality will become less virtual and more reality for many. However, I see this as an addiction phenomenon that will likely inspire us to understand unexplored dimensions of being human.” – Barry Chudakov, principal, The Chudakov Company

“Autonomous systems will not become a serious problem until they are sophisticated enough to be conscious Â… As it stands now, they are simply tools – advanced tools, but tools nonetheless. True AI is still 50-100 years away,” – Simon Woodside, CEO, Semacode Corp, Ontario, Canada.

“A human’s desire is to reinvent himself, live out his fantasies, overindulge; addiction will definitely increase. Whole communities/subcultures, which even today are a growing faction, will materialise. We may see a vast blurring of virtual/real reality with many participants living an in-effect secluded lifestyle. Only in the online world will they participate in any form of human interaction.” – Robert Eller, technology consultant

“Now, fear of enslavement by our creations is an old fear, and a literary tritism. But I fear something worse and much more likely – that sometime after 2020 our machines will become intelligent, evolve rapidly, and end up treating us as pets. We can at least take comfort that there is one worse fate – becoming food – that mercifully is highly unlikely.” – Paul Saffo, director of the Institute for the Future.

“While this scenario is clearly a danger, we don’t yet understand how powerful fully-connected human beings can be.” – Mary Ann Allison, a futurist and chairman and chief cybernetics officer for The Allison Group

“There will be an increasing problem with people ‘disconnecting’ during their so-called leisure time and immersing themselves in purely virtual realities for entertainment purposes. We’ve already seen how these can be addictive, and, by 2020, the technological capability for them might be near ubiquitous – leading to perhaps an entire generation ‘opting-out’ of the real world and a paradoxical decrease in productivity as the people who provide the motive economic power no longer are in touch with the realities of the real world.” – Glenn Ricart, a member of the board of trustees of the Internet Society

“First, there is nothing virtual about digitalised space. It has real-life effects, rewards, and problems. Second, what do we lose people to today? Is it better to go jump off a mountainside for your kicks or do drugs than to spend it in some digital version of reality that feels better and more rewarding? The main problem isn’t that ‘virtual worlds’ are addictive; it is that the physical world is not sufficiently challenging and rewarding. Blaming the media should not be a way out of fixing the very real social problems the world faces.” – Torill Mortensen of Volda University College in Norway

“It will be possible for computer users to build ‘alternate realities’ around themselves, and some will find this environment to be so much more appealing and comfortable than the ‘real world’ that they will prefer it. I see a future epidemic, especially among children and teens.” – Michael Cann Jr., CEO of Affinio Corporation

“‘Virtual reality’ is a pointless and dated term that has no meaning other than the technical (computer science) definition. We live in a pervasive communication environment and this will only increase. The demarcation of virtual and real and mediated and non-mediated will have no meaning for most people and is an artifact of older generations. Reality will be one seamless world that spans face-to-face and digital areas of action. If anything, the ability to physically take a class or travel to meet with someone will be considered an elite privilege.” – Ted Coopman of the University of Washington

“What people refer to as ‘virtual reality’ is still an aspect of all of our reality – it’s not a separate reality any more than books, movies, video games, or our imagination is a separate reality. Saying someone is addicted to virtual reality will one day sound as ridiculous as saying some people today are addicted to books.” – Patrick O’Sullivan of Illinois State University

“Synthetic worlds are simply intermediate environments: the first settlements in the vast, uncharted territory that lies between humans and their machines Â… Ensuring that the technology serves such a marvelous end, rather than a lesshappy one, is the real challenge for the next few decades. We will be less likely to meet that challenge the longer we treat video games as mere child’s play…There is a huge throng of people just waiting at their terminals for a fantasy world to come along, one that is just immersive enough, under the technology they can afford, to induce them to take the plunge and head off into the frontier forever.” – Edward Castronova, from his book Synthetic Worlds

There are many more insights in the Pew Futures PDF on privacy, globalisation, transparency and priorities.

Oct 152006
 

Barrier Social NetworkGot a constipated blog draft situation – lots of half finished posts in the saved area. So to catch up I take a mouthful of wordpress ‘fibre’ and put these out slightly half baked, drafts to mentally move on. Oh the compromised nature of blogging! Its a shame because this particular one is the big issue at the moment. Still part of my assimilation process too. There will be a few more catch up posts in next couple of days…

“Just had a week break walking in the rainforests of Far North Queensland and diving in the Great Barrier Reef and as one does in the relative solitude I kept thinking about the reasons people join and use social networks? Around 600 million or a 10th of the planet now take part in online social networks. With the mighty Google and YouTube now controlling 60% of all shared video on the planet and the potential that MySpace may be made interoperable with both of them we are starting to see a major consolidation in the way we share and communicate. I have also talked before about web 3.0 and the impact of immersive areas on social networks, also about advertising in social nets (part two will have more) but for now I am keen to see how ‘business’ and to some extent professionals can play a part in this. The biggest question on everyones mind. I might make this a two part post as I am still formulating but here is part one (sitting in draft for weeks!).

Part One

Apart from the obvious reason that humans are evolved social animals and simply need to communicate with each other to survive mentally (less so physically today of course), doing this via the intraweb, though abstracted interfaces, and clumsy tools is a far less efficient medium than face-to-face. Also the new social networks are easily the equivalents of what used to traditionally be mass media – the water cooler is now transformed into a database-driven, globally connected, busy-bee-hive of media nibbling participants. But of course there are far more elements at play here beyond just, ‘contact’, so I thought I would throw a ‘media laymans’ group of enablers to the great social network explosion.

This is not academic in nature, that would be in PDF format and have a PhD disclaimer attached of course, not this is just observation and open to flames and debate. Even this post itself is part of one of the areas I will be discussing, the constant ‘injest and regurgitation’ aspect which will be referred to. The reason I wanted to understand what the ‘motivational’ draw of social networks is, is to work out at what points advertising, subscription or pay-per-service actually make most sense. There are potentially many models that can come into play that are being overlooked by the current plethora of networking services. Part of this came on a personal note when I was struck by a synergistic push, an email from Friends Reunited towards their Genes Reunited a couple of days ago. For various reasons I checked it out. Just at the point I had found a potential long lost relative it asked me to subscribe for the year at $20 Aus. This allowed me to contact (like LinkedIn’s chain of contact) to owners of family trees that may contain members. I dug a little deeper and at the point I wanted to check the online birth records back to the 1600’s another fee $7.95 required. The message here is work out when user need is the greatest, when the experience is about to jump a level and place a micro-(or major) fee on it.
Lets look at a real world metaphor. The social network of the ‘bar or club’. People are driven to a place where it is easy to express and talk, express their sexuality, have conversations, show off, dance, escape from normal life, feel safe (or feel in ‘safe’ danger – space cadet mode), feel connected to a larger group and so on. To achieve each of the non exhaustive list above what do they happily spend money on?

a) They pay entrance fees for a kind of exclusivity,

b) buy lots of drinks to escape and make conversation easier, spend money on clothes to attract new partners before they arrive,

c) buy music to get clued up and appear to be up to date –

I will stop this ‘day one’ social anthropological study just to point out that for social network designers, we need to think about the ‘experience’ that users want and charge them for those things they value most highly if any kind of money is going to be made. So entrance fees for exclusivity, no brainer, make it easy to escape/safe haven (which is why virtual worlds are growing) and around that the ‘tipped’ barman model, pushing conversation along, cross-recommending people (the escort role) finally making sure that there are lots of cross-media links, to extend the world, aid learning and sharing and not make it feel claustraphobic.

Before we go further though what is a social network via the intraweb? Wikipedia has a definitive list here so will not relink from here. But what are social networks used for.

  1. Keeping up with partners/friends/contacts. Social and business
  2. Generating new partners/friends/contacts. Social and business
  3. Sharing your media with the world. Social and professional
  4. Being part of like-minded, niche-interest, speciality groups
  5. Targeted ‘contact’ services for family and very close friends
  6. Various clusters of blogs that organically form into social networks
  7. Collaboratively creating and potentially monetising that content
  8. Combinations of all of the above

Why do we join these social networks and what may be the points we can monetise? Assume with all of these that the key business model of ‘targeted’ and ‘personalized’ advertising can run throughout. Relevant ISN (In Social Network) content and OSN (off social network) product will be gently pushed, after opt-in, to participants. There may be a general subscription to use the service and most things may be included with that, what follows though looks more at the free-to-join, pay-per-socialise type model.

Social Currency

Bush Fire near CairnsSlightly more abstract in nature but to make it easier to grasp. This post is part of social currency. The fact that I have decided to share some of my meandering, random thoughts, the fact that you are reading it still, may lead you to consider adding me to a blogroll (go on!) make your own comment, tell others, be inspired to rip off parts of it and so on. It all comes down to “this person has contributed content/ideas that are of value to me”. This model becomes a social currency of sorts – you do this long and hard enough and you gain a position of trust and like heritage media, you get enough people reading, listening or watching your stuff – well you know the rest. But there is a problem. Many heritage media folk I talk too still think that model exists – people will pay for content in the same way they paid for books, music and film. Up to a point. But we are now in a world where the value of your content is based on the ‘collectively agreed’ value of your social wealth. Slightly utopian I know, but like the world of art, people will pay $2million for a painting that cost $10 to make, if everyone agrees it is worth that. Same with gold, same with virtual gold or land and so on. So for media creators, you need to create a social status around your content in the blogosphere and on these social networks to then be able to start to charge for and heres the kicker – digital, limited editions. It will happen. Part of the progression of these business models is a system that hackers will not break (even if they can) because it is ‘socially’ unacceptable and there will be less anonymity, greifers and hackers will be visible and ostracised. Piracy also will not be good for much longer.

Peer pressure

We want to be part of a community of small group. Natural human desire. We dont get that very easily anymore in modern society. Where most of the teenagers in the US create blog communities around their existing 20 plus friends for example, these social networks are almost obligatory for certain key demographics. “What, you dont have a MySpace account!”.

A Gary Business Model Tip – have tiered levels of subscription. The free means you will get pushed advertising (naturally!), may get hit by griefers (those who just like to irritate others), and you will not get by default an ability to create a private group or perform a host of customisations. This comes with a subscription. Tie that into a ‘recommend a friend’ into your private group credit so you are growing clusters of private groups – this of course does not mean these participants cannot join the wider network. There may even be a higher tier for organisations who want to use the tools of the network but just for the organisation – this is a model I haven’t seen used that often. A MySpace for the GPS Postal Workers in the US? A Friendster for the 25 000 that work at the BBC? Almost enterprise software with some customisation. Another I am looking at, a Second Life for worldwide media schools. Special rates and custom firewall type gates to the wider networks.

Because its free and easy

The tools for blogging are essentially the same as the tools within most social networks. As blogs go above 100 million and social networks combined go above 600 million the number of participants is almost proportional to the ease of use of the ‘tool’. Creating a website in the early 90s required a level of technical prowess. Creating a dynamic, database driven website in the early 00’s likewise. Now any user can build a rich media dynamic web presence, espress their view and package their world for all to see as simply as using a word processor (almost).

Gary’s Biz Mod tip – As the open source tools become more free and easy to use there is a market for charging for the integration and bells and whistle elements (plug-ins) that is not being leveraged. A key differentiator to the ‘publisher’ (viewer creator or the old UGC) is showing off. In virtual worlds a big part of the economy is ‘buying stuff’ – mostly to show off to peers/dates/gameplay etc: Those who can develop even cooler ways to present, even around open source tools, have a big, very big market. We have not seen a really good tool for example that is a one stop shop for podcasting, vodcasts, blogs, preparing graphics, editing sound and publishing it all and so on. MySpace is pretty crude, web 1999, I think there are social nets around the corner ready to take the baton.

To be heard

Never before in the history of mankind has one individual been able to at no cost, or relative risk, been able to express his or her opinion. This is intoxicating enough already for many enlightened people, but when the rest of the world catches on to this, watch out. You aint seen nothing yet. Of course as we have seen with YouTube the sharing of what many people in the developed world can produce now with little effort (video) has sky rocketed in the past months. Much of this is driven by the need to share something personal or funny or dramatic with the world for altruistic reasons but much comes down to vanity publishing and the next topic.

Gary’s Biz Mod tip – create competitions for fee to participate and upload or share your content around themes and develop internal economies linked to social credit. Facilitation of themed content participation that has entry fees, sponsorship and across the network voting encourages loyalty. Make the prizes big enough. Put the winners on the still existing parts of mass media. At the moment most ‘calls’ are share based formats particularly with broadcasters and most of the other several hundred call for submission sites. I think something like TriggerStreet could easily generate within it a viable economy – social credits are transferrable for more real world

To find stuff

Being part of a good social network often means you have a digital fingerprint, a profile. The advantages of this as a user is you are able to be matched with and be presented with content (which includes people – as personalizemedia readers will know in the digital world we are all represented by clumps of metadata, social networks are no different). So through a series of collaborative filters, dumb and intelligent recommendation agents and user tracking these networks actually connect us better to other content and people than independent systems.

Gary’s Biz Mod tip – like my Genes Reunited hint earlier, there is the potential to monetize (at micro level) connectivity. The dating sites have worked this out already, tempt you with a potential partner and a fee required to make the actual contact. In a social network there are many ways to tempt users with the promise of lots of really cool content they will like (and content includes other people). Like some of the immersive virtual worlds, the sort of 10c for ten albums you dont own but would die for, a dollar for the people most like you and so on – you get the idea…many have been implemented already, but this ‘find-for-fee’ model is really under used at the moment and open for new players/alogorithms, intelligent agents and artificial intelligence to come into play.

‘Random’ minutes of fame

I will not resort to using the obligatory Andy Warhol phrase or variants of. Simply that being able to become ‘famous’ is a big reason people use social networks. The notoriety of being the most downloaded video, the best reviewer or the most hit blog post is again a compelling reason to participate.

Gary’s Biz Mod tip – Monetize the ability for people to be included in these top tens. A small fee gets you considered for the hall of fame. Perhaps have an internal currency so you can organise ‘electoral’ style lobbying to get votes. Add a real world element (physical prize sponsored by an advertiser who wants to get noticed) to make the carrot even bigger. Also give people content themes to upload as in the ‘to be heard section above’.

Escapism and Addiction

Modern society is full of trials and tribulations (I know sounds like a voice over for an old movie) but the web is a place that millions are withdrawing into. Never before has the disenfranchised been able to find solace with like-minded others, or teenage angst been shared. Some social networks like second life (I oft post about) are alternate worlds in themselves and deliver potentially total immersion and alternate identity. But the more general 2D social networks allow one to escape the bounds of geography, time and true identity. That again is compelling enough for many.

As mentioned above. Pay-for-escapism. Events for your peer group. A special event only you and your friends can chat with a celeb for fee. Work on the group vs group, tribe vs tribe mentality to encourage some competition on doing the coolest, escapist things, that you can do online. OK sounds like drug pushing – I know. But what has the media been for the past 1000 years. The ‘I have gotta have it’ because everyone else has is working on us at a primal level – don’t want to be ostracised because I am not fitting in. Charging for ‘must have it’ is what advertising is – an ad blitz for the latest movie, is nothing more than filling your neural maps with the property and brand, via the back door. Being hooked on drugs works on the same associative, emotionally linked neural net principles.

A sticky post I did called Media Addiction the next wave which implies this most obvious business model, make it hard for them to give up and the escapist element we are seeing with the social nets inside say World of Warcraft (the guild must-take-part or I lose social standing) for example are verging on the ‘addictive drug’ parallel. The key is to know on a pay-per-hit model the point at which it is impossible to refuse. As I said in the other post – there is an element of getting them hooked (immersed, engaged etc) then introducing a fee. OK the immersion and level of interaction with others is compelling but not addictive, what is addictive is ‘it is harder to stop than to start somewhere else’. So much time and effort is already invested in building up profiles, making contact lists. I wonder if the one trick pony Google with its ad search model would consider slipping in subs for premium parts of video sharing once it has swallowed up the next 10% of video? MSN and Yahoo excluded…;-)

Time out on this one. Part Two soon – mostly focusing on the holy grail business model, targeted and personalized opt in advertising!

Posted by Gary Hayes ©2006

2 pages