Famine City

Digital behaviors follow you and privacy is dead

 

About a week ago, my seven year old son asks me at breakfast "dad, what is sexting?" Though I wasn't prepared for the question, I did manage a good response.  At a larger level what stood out as my future challenge is making the digital behaviors an issue that my kids should take seriously. It's a stark new reality. Our young people may not understand or appreciate the lasting impact of their digital behaviors. Digital behaviors follow you and there is no such thing as privacy. Privacy is dead. 

First and foremost, your digital behaviors follow you. Behind every text, every search and tweet is a little digital footprint, some of them self-disclosed, some of them not. As I was preparing a presentation recently, I thought I'd go investigating some of the most recent posts from TextsFromLastNight.com. This site basically is a submission site for funny, risque text messages that are often related to alcohol, drugs or sex. Within a span of about fifteen minutes, I was able to find the originator of at least 4 comments with minimal effort. In fact there is no guarantee these individuals consented to sharing this content, but I still found them rather easily. The message is clear, digital footprints will always lead back to originator. As organizations, we are expected to take the privacy of our patrons very, very seriously. As consumers in a digital world, we are willfully giving up our privacy more so than ever.

The problem isn't just limited to messages and pictures that we send through our phones. It's also our location. A recent site has received a bit of attention, www.pleaserobme.com. This site basically scours Twitter and posts individual's locations that have been self-published via FourSquare. The notion of the site is to raise awareness on our own self-disclosure or our current location, which may not be at home. While good companies of the world are finding new and innovative ways to offer goods and services to our potential consumers, there is a contingent that will use these services for ill. Be ready. 

So far, we've covered text messaging and pictures. However, those are quickly going to take the backseat to full streaming video. Web video is the future and it's here today, complete with cameras in our netbooks, laptops and mobile phones backed by high speed networks. I am very concerned about this growing digital behavior. You might be concerned about adult websites and the YouTubes, but I'd put those on the backseat. It's not those websites I am worried about. Enter Chat Roulette that was created by a 17-year old digital native that wanted to chat with people around the world. The site basically allows you to randomly chat with whoever is connected to the service. Daniel Tosh, comedian, recently had a skit on it that seemed about right; about every chat seemed to be some guy with genitalia in front of his webcam. With the media hyping this site, which is having the exact opposite effect of what they are reporting, the site's popularity has grown to 881, according to Alexa (US). No age checks, no verification and just about every computer made today is equipped to participate. Check please, call me "officially" scared.  

Not all privacy disclosure is necessarily bad. As I mentioned previously, people are willfully giving up their privacy and we're going to continue to see this behavior grow. In fact, we're going to be incentivized to give up more in the future. Places like Mint.com offers a service for us to give up some of our privacy. They give us financial modeling and in return we provide them with our consumer transaction behavior. We also see this with our loyalty cards in most of our grocery stores. We let them track us and they sell our data to marketers/researchers. In return they provide us with lower prices (not sure about this) and custom coupons. My expectation is this type of tracking will soon make it's way to health insurance companies too. Insurance companies will incentivize us to disclose our health related data, they'll sell this data. In return we'll get free prescriptions, lower premiums or some other cross subsidy. I welcome things like this because scale data of that sort can ultimately lead to better outcomes for patient care (if used properly). It's a win-win in my book. Not all privacy disclosure is bad. 

This piece isn't just about privacy. It's about what to teach your digital natives about technology and unforeseen outcomes of changes in the digital space. Here's my quick guide:

• Transparency: I quite hate this term, but I'll use it anyway. Mark Zuckerburg recently said, “public is the new social norm”, ergo there is nothing private. As I explained to my seven year old, our lives are open books, let's embrace it (leveraging it when we can). There are good consequences to our behaviors and bad consequences to our behaviors. Let's make a choice to make sure there's a lot more marks in the good consequences column. Aside: Good blog piece on this subject from Critical Mass. 
  
• Connect online to offline: In the not so distant past, digital behaviors were separated from our offline existence. This is no longer the case. Your digital behaviors can have severe impact online and offline. 
  
• Long lasting effects: Once data is digitized, it is stored, cached, recorded, emailed, texted and so forth. The implications of one's behaviors can have lasting repercussions.
  
• Teach it: You can't escape the society that we live in. We're officially connected. I think this might be as important as teaching a kid about drugs or alcohol. 

I realize that my family is inundated with technology as it is part of our livelihood, maybe more than most. I cannot nor want to escape this. I want to deal with this upfront. I think it will position my kids for success in the future. Therefore I try to teach the right behavior at every opportunity possible. I want to reinforce our other values so that their online and offline behaviors are consistent in the new reality where privacy is gone and our digital behaviors are with us for a long, long time. 

follow me on twitter @marty_b

Meet the New Digital Native

In full disclosure, the child in the video is one my children. While he is my child, my hope is this post does not appear narcissistic. 

Meet Brady. 

Brady is 4 years old. 

Brady knows how to read. 

Brady knows how to do basic math. 

Brady knows how to use Facebook. He doesn't have a profile, but he likes to play Fishlife on Facebook.  

Brady plays games on the Wii.

Brady knows how to use the Tivo. He also knows how to skip your commercials using the Tivo. 

Brady knows how to watch his favorite cartoons via Netflix.  

Brady likes to watch movies on YouTube.  

Brady knows how to use Google.

Brady knows how to use an iPhone.

Brady is a digital native. 

As a reminder, Brady is four years old and he knows how to use a variety of digital technologies. He is the new testing standard if an application is designed well. If someone needs to explain how to use your application, tool or website, you might be in trouble. And Brady isn't alone. 

Our little digital natives are raising the bar on digital design, whether on hardware or on your website. I was discussing with a colleague at another company and we were exchanging thoughts about how our four year olds use technology--desktop computers, websites and mobile devices. We were discussing the question of usability, especially around the Apple devices. Has the usability of the devices become so good that our digital natives can figure it out without prompting? Or might it be they don't have any "ghost rules"? Meaning they don't have preconceived notions about the way things work. Therefore they aren't annoyed when things don't work the way they expect them to and hyper-learn around any usability issues. Welcome to our future consumers.

How can a four year old child use the applications and devices that still confound many adults? After much thought on the subject, I'm going to borrow the thinking and approach from Malcolm Gladwell's Blink, it's rapid cognition. Our little digital natives have been exposed, actively and passively, to so much digital behavior that the usability of technology, hardware or software, they are able to rapidly deduce the usability of our devices without thinking. They don't deliberate on how something works or why it should work in a certain way. They simply find the critical pieces of information and try something else, but without actively thinking of it. If it doesn't function one way, they apply the other hundreds of other ways to use/consume the information. They no longer actively "think" about the technology or usability. They simply act with critical pieces of information. Our digital natives may grow up to be the most transactional users we've ever seen.  

In the new world of applications and devices, they have to work like you'd expect them to work or so easy that a four year old could use it. Perhaps we need to stop testing with all of our target markets and bring in legions of pre-schoolers. Then ask them if they can find or locate a desired result on our applications or website. See what happens. While this is partially tongue in cheek, get ready for the new users of our applications and websites. Our little digital natives are going to be more transactional than ever. With so many digital tools at their disposal, they'll navigate around whatever experience you want them to take--obvious implications for marketers everywhere. You'll get two clicks on your website, if you're lucky. Be usable or be forgotten. 

Our digital behaviors are having major impacts on media consumption as a whole. Little digital natives no longer need to watch television, though they will. They can find their favorite shows on YouTube, Netflix. Sure we can still market to big audiences on the big tube, but gone soon enough will be the days of channel surfing. It will be channel searching. The most important screens won't be the ones in the living room either. It will be the ones in their hands. Transactional behaviors and omnipresent media will be the expectation not the exception for these little folks. 

Where to start? Easy. Make sure your apps and sites are so easy a four year old could use it. Ask the adults about brand impression or favorability. Ask the kids about the usability of it. They don't think. They use. Start there. 

----------------

Comment: I expect some feedback about my kid's use of digital technology from a parenting perspective. We are probably more conservative than most about the information they consume, it's a constant conversation in our house. We are a digital household, my wife and I are both into technology for work and play. Our kids will be digital experts. I appreciate comments about the core point of this piece. However, if you are thinking of leaving a comment about parental education or proselytizing to us about how we're raising our children, please don't bother.  

follow me on twitter @marty_b

Delta Electronic Boarding Pass = WIN

A couple weeks ago I had the good pleasure of visiting Vegas. As a technoid and a traveler, I was pretty excited to see there was an electronic boarding pass option for my flight when checking in on Delta's website. Finally, an easy way to get my boarding pass to my phone, one less piece of something that I need to think about during travel. Previous to this experience, about a month ago, I tried an to use an electronic boarding option for United with no success. So I was excited to see the option and used it successfully, but not without considerations. 

Correction: I received a tweet with the more accurate standard. If you're interested visit: http://2d-code.co.uk/iata-standard/

So what is an electronic boarding pass? It's a QR code, or more accurately 2d bar code that contains all of your flight and ticket information which allows TSA and the gate agent to scan the details of your ticket. For Delta, when you select an electronic boarding pass during check in on their website, they ask for your mobile number. You are then sent a link via SMS message which you can then browse to via your mobile device to retrieve your electronic boarding pass. This allows for any phone with SMS and mobile web browsing to use the electronic boarding pass functionality. The QR code appears as a JPG on your phone. You present it when needed at TSA/gate. Simple enough. 

While traveling out to Vegas, my comrades and I mostly used the electronic boarding passes. I was surprised to hear the gate agent say this was the most that he had seen on any single flight--personally I was waiting for sirens to go off, but all went off without a hitch on the way out. <<< Notice the use of foreshadowing here, eighth grade literature wasn't lost on me Ms. Jenkins :)

What would make this little bit of easy even better? Being able to sign in from their mobile website and send the electronic version of the boarding pass back to your phone. This way, you can completely bypass the whole desktop user experience. Well needless to say, it's available. Delta uses a portal technology, Usablenet.com, which basically creates a mobile site from your existing site. It allows you to check in, change your seat and send the boarding pass to your phone. I'm in love with taking one less thing with me and had zero problems with this. It's expected that by 2011 all airlines will be using this technology. If it's not available to you today, it will be in the near future. 

As a sidenote, if you are a frequent traveler consider adding http://www.usablenet.com to your boormarks or favorites. They have content for many hotels and transportion options via their mobile portal. Good to have handy. While I've talked to a few folks that are not as keen on the mobile site from Delta and other Usablenet.com supported sites, I'm to the minimalist side of things. Provide basic functionality, verify it works and then extend the functionality as mass use comes to fruition. 

Like many things, this electronic boarding pass system is far from perfect. We had one person that had the electronic boarding pass up on their phone before they arrived at the TSA agent. He switched browsers or something on his iPhone and when he got to the TSA agent, he could not show it to the agent. This was problematic. However, if your phone happened to run out of juice that could also be a problem as well. The worst case scenario in either case is that you'd have to go request a paper ticket. This did not cause any significant delays for him, but if you were tight on time or something like that I could imagine some stress. However, these odds are about the same as other travel woes in my guesstimation. 

I love this system of of airline boarding. It just makes sense and is a great use of technology. Though this has been available in Western Europe for a number of years, I'm very excited to see it take place in the airline industry. The airline industry is what I would consider a highly protected industry. If QR codes and 2D barcodes can get government adoption, I imagine that things like mobile coupons will have a much better opportunity to be adopted if standard is set in the airline industry. 

Adopting new technologies one day at a time. 

follow me on twitter @marty_b

To iPad or not to iPad

The much ballyhooed iPad will be arriving pretty soon and there is a ton to think about with this device. Apple clearly built on their successes and even took a few issues with them into the new product offering. Whether or not you buy this device, it’s a step forward for network computers and lightweight computing. Surprisingly enough, one of the winners with the iPad might be Google (again). The other winner might be higher education. The question is whether or not Apple is taking aim at its future business model, publishing? Finally, if you are a marketer, how you should approach the iPad.

If you said the iPad is an overgrown iPhone and you’d be pretty much on point. The iPad is taking advantage of all the successes that the iPod started creating almost ten years ago. Some of the successes include:

• Capitalizing on a scale user base
• Centralized app store through iTunes: This facilitates an easy way to purchase, install and remove applications on the device.
• Simplified control interface: Controls are highly similar across many applications, in location, modification and configuration. This simplifies usage of the device, which is especially important for the iPhone.
• Centralized developer services: While there may be people pro or con about Apple’s management of the developer resources on the App Store/iTunes, there are very few people that I hear complaining about crashes with core functionality of the phone, web and email when installing new applications. This means they probably have quality control down pretty well.
• GPS services: The device uses A-GPS, assisted GPS, for the ever growing location based service industry.
• Uses many of the same core applications on the device, from iTunes, Safari and email.
• It uses network computing or lightweight computing to its best ability, using and obtaining data for network services as needed instead of loading it onto the hard drive of the device.
• Good battery life.
• Backwards compatibility with your favorite iPhone applications

With that being said, there are some incumbent problems that are also being inherited from the iPhone as well:  

• The AT&T’s G-network coverage is not exactly stellar.
• Lack of Flash support.
• No camera on this device: Rumor has it this might change.
• No video streaming with the device: Streaming may be possible, but local storage probably not a great idea.
• No additional memory option.
• OLED screen: An OLED screen uses much less power and is easier on the eyes.
• Will not run multiple applications simultaneously.
• Lacks support for multiple users, not an issue on the iPhone, but certainly for the iPad. 

While the promise of HTML 5 (don't let it escape you that both Google and Apple contributed to tech specifications) makes the need for Flash non-existent, it’s a miss on the web today. This takes the multimedia capabilities of this device considerably less, think Hulu or Netflix. HTML 5 is still a promise and not ready to deliver to the consumers today. Therefore, not supporting Flash is a huge miss. However, like most things Apple I would expect some type of fix for this to be in the pipeline not long after the release. My suspicion is that when full video is released for places like Netflix and Hulu, it will be a WiFi only service. Today, the rumors have it that the network simply cannot handle the extra load it would create on the network. Again, Apple tends to have some type of “fix” for deficiencies that usually end up profiting their business.

One of the main successes pf the iPhone platform is the lightweight nature of the applications. The iPad will also capitalize on this success. The applications on the iDevices are a graceful mix of utility and marketing quite often. The iPhone personifies application marketing better than any other product/service, sans Google, providing users both service and utility. Look for this trend to continue on the iPad by providing lightweight and network dependent applications that utilize technology better well.

Another exploit for the iPad will be the realization of the network computing dream (at least it is closer). For the 70-80% of consumers that simply need email, word processing, web browsing, search and some multimedia usage, the iPad will handle these services gracefully. The reason why this will work on the iPad vs the netbook is simple: The netbook is so much like a laptop, our consumer expectations and behaviors are the same—we were disappointed when our netbook did not function like our desktop computer. The form and function the iPad provides will set that expectation correctly, providing lightweight network applications efficiently.

When you do think of network computing, perhaps the clear owner of this in the consumer arena is Google. They will also benefit from this device. At the core of the iPad it is a network computing device that relies on networks to be present to really have any level of functionality. They have a suite of applications like, Gmail, Google Docs, Maps, Latitude and Google Search that will be ready to deploy on the iPad the second it ships. Google has mastered the art of creating usable network apps. The iPad will simply add to Google’s scale.

Apple has learned from history. If you want to be indoctrinated with generations to come, you get them when they are learning consumer behaviors like in college. The iPad is going to be a mainstay in higher education institutions. My prediction is there will be adoption at colleges by the fall of 2010. The iPad is a boon for the classroom, especially at the college level where connected classrooms are growing. Better battery life allows the device to make it through an entire academic day. The iPad provides an easy way to interact with connected classrooms—answering polls, comments and such in real time. Remember, engagement doesn’t just happen on your website any more. It’s going to happen in the classroom as well. Students are growing to expect this as part of the classroom experience. Finally academic institutions can begin to control the costs of books which are ridiculously high. Publishers like this because they are finally going to be a hero. They can actually lower the cost of a textbook and keep more of the proceeds from their sales. It’s a win-win for Apple, textbook publishers and higher education. Remember: Students want Apple products. There is an implied equity and purchase path/history. Education was always an equity mainstay for Apple and they are returning to this heritage.

The real question is will Apple change their core business model. The publishing model in terms of applications, music and textbooks might prove to be an easier, more sustainable business than their desktop computing division over time. They simply provide the purchasing mechanism, scale audience and serve as a quality gatekeeper for their platform, making money off the transactions between publisher and consumer. For Apple to continue this model, they’ll need to keep delivering on the elegance of the Apple experience, new innovations every 2-3 years. They have a unique ability to create products people want. I think this is a unique advantage over other ebook platforms. The Apple experience isn’t just in the utility of the product. It starts with the packaging. It’s a bit of a luxury product that delivers at every step of a transaction, three equal parts of elegance, utility and want. Therefore I believe that the iPad will be successful. Apple has transformed the music industry. If they succeed in college publishing, expect magazines and newspapers to quickly follow. In fact, Apple just might save newspapers for a few more years, finally providing them a viable subscription model. Then it’s on to the biggie. Television. If Apple truly enters the television market, looking like a Netflix partnership in my mind, watch out cable companies.

As a marketer and wondering what the iPad means for you? It's easy. Focus on what you do well. Then extend your brand onto the platform. Think of products and services like Spark People, Mint or Pandora. They simply extend their desktop functionality onto your mobile device. It’s a wonderful convergence and a natural extension of their brand today. Like the iPhone, the iPad will continue to dissolve the lines between the mobile web and web. The brands that succeed in this space will be those that actually provide a service or utility on the device. Don’t try to do everything well. Find natural information or service you brand can own on the device and start there.

Follow me on twitter @marty_b

Will Haiti increase awareness of mobile commerce?

 

According to an article on Inforum the text to donate program for Hatian Relief has been extraordinarily successful:

The American Red Cross has raised more than $22 million for Haiti earthquake relief, all from text message donations. By texting the word "Haiti" to the number 9-0-9-9-9, a $10 donation is automatically sent to the Red Cross Earthquake fund. That donation amounts to about a fifth of the $112 million the Red Cross has raised to help Haiti so far.

I am very excited and pleased that this effort has been successful. However, after much reluctance for mobile commerce to take off here in the US, I'm left with a number of questions? Are people donating because of emotion? Is it because they do not have to setup a new payment service? Why are people embracing donations in this way? And then, beyond the unfortunate circumstances in Haiti: When is mobile commerce going to take off? Will this effort be the catalyst that finally germinates the seed of mobile commerce in North America? Unfortunately, I don't have most of the answers, simply more questions. 

I am left confused why people have not exploited mobile commerce. In tough economic times, taking on a new way that might allow more commerce seems like an easy call to make. Even though (my guess) is that providers like Mpayy might have high transaction costs in some cases, in a down economy even marginal sales could be important. It would also enable credit at events where cash has traditionally been king, like outdoor festivals and events. 

On the upside, I am seeing more and more mobile payment applications in the app store. While that obviously only applies to iPhones, it seems this user based might be more apt to use mobile payments. There are applications like FonePays that allow for SMS based dollar exchange. There's also services like YAP which basically is a credit card like system with an SMS interface. It's a system where you load money into it, accessing and transferring dollars from your mobile device. For a service like YAP, if they prove it works, it'd be easier for a company like American Express to simply offer this service. However, there always has to be a trailblazer and YAP might be that trailblazer. 

At a base level, I don't see why businesses have not even tried to exploit PayPal? PayPal is an easy way to integrate all of your online and credit card payments. There's also a PayPal app as well for the iPhone. You can pay your bill via PayPal. I'm simply wondering why I have not seen it somewhere outside of the online space. While I do understand that cost can be prohibitive at times for some businesses (PayPal isn't cheap), but it's also the cost of doing business at some level. 

Will 2010 be the year of mcommerce? No, I cannot say it will be. However, I will say that the events in Haiti will lead to increased awareness mobile commerce. Additionally, I do hope and anticipate that towards the end of the year we may see some of the mobile pay services pop up in the largest of our US metropolitan areas. I would also expect that a company like Google, PayPal or American Express will be the that does have payment services will lead the way in this arena. 

follow me on twitter @marty_b

Economists might be the computer scientists of tomrorow

Over the past few years the some of the fastest growing professions have been in the area of technology and healthcare services. You can see the predictions to the right here from the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the growing professions from 2008-2018. While not on this list, I think that economists are going to have a growth spurt or rise in demand in the coming years. Why? 

The why is simple. We need people to make sense out of all of the data we are collecting everywhere around us. Economists might just have the best suited skill and tool set that aid in deconstructing this level of scale data. 

Wikipedia's entry, courtesy of The Economist, says:

Economists work in many fields including academia, government and in the private sector, where they may also "...study data and statistics in order to spot trends in economic activity, economic confidence levels, and consumer attitudes. They assess this information using advanced methods in statistical analysis, mathematics, computer programming [and] they make recommendations about ways to improve the efficiency of a system or take advantage of trends as they begin. 

Economists have a unique tool set. One that isn't really found in a ton of fields. Economists are trained in dealing with scale or volumes of data. In fact, they thrive one it. They also have the unique ability to analyze the data with statistical analysis and mathematics. However, most often people think immediately of dollars when thinking about economists, but that's not at the heart of it. It's the study of incentives and what levers (read incentives) will drive a particular behavior. 

If you notice, I just mentioned behavior. That's because economics is a social science. It's grounded just enough in the social science with the tools of a math-a-magician. This, as it turns out, is about the perfect mix or skills and tools to make sense of the ever growing volumes of data that we are accumulating. There is so much information and data that we cannot ever begin to know what to do with it. However, that is where economists come in to assist and make sense of it. 

I've read Freakonomics and am currently reading Superfreakonomics. Of course, Levitt and Dubner have talent, unique insight and are (obviously) great writers. However, what stands out about the books are that when you pickup a tool set from one profession and apply it to another, there are some pretty interesting results. 

So my prediction is that economists are going to be more and more in demand in the coming years. Or said more like an economist: the price of their services will increase as consumer demand for their services increase. The raise in incentives for the profession will pull more people into it. 

I love this blog from Jodi Beggs, Economists Do It With Models. She's smart, funnny and interesting. 

 

follow me on twitter @marty_b

Do you adopt or integrate?

In technology and marketing, we often talk about early adopters, innovators etc. when describing our user base or target market information. For a reminder about the specifics, visit Wikipedia's entry on Rogers' Diffusion Model. If you have followed this blog, I have poked and prodded at the diffusion model for some time and will continue today. 

I don't care about adoption any longer. I care about integration. The audience that integrates is my target market not just those who purchase the technology. 

Adoption is yesterday's news. Integration is today's most important aspect around a marketing or technology market. Let me go on to explain what I mean.  

• Traditionally adoption in the past means that you own a technology and may have tried it. However, it does not imply or require that you are actively engaged with said technology. 
• Integration means (at least to me) that you own the technology and it's a vital part of your life. Said simply, you can't live without the technology or you rely on it to a degree where it causes pain if it is not present. 

Why such an important distinction? Simple. Adoption isn't a channel and should not be a target audience until there is integration. My pet peeve in this area are people that own HD televisions, but do not have HD programming. I would argue they are only adopters, but not integrators. Sure, they have this great big screen with pixelation all over the place. When considering target audiences or adoption statistics, especially as it pertains to new technologies, it comes with some surprising math. Let's look at target numbers for mobile adoption for North America: 

• There were 254 million US mobile subscribers in Q1 2008, according to CTIA, the wireless industry trade group
• According to Nielsen, 144 million (57%) US mobile subscribers were data users in Q1 2008 (defined as those subscribers who used their phone for any data use, be that SMS text messaging or accessing the mobile Internet)
• 95 million (37 percent) US mobile subscribers paid for access to the mobile Internet, either as part of a subscription or transactionally
• 40 million subscribers (15.6 percent in May 2008) were active users of mobile Internet services, using those services at least once on a monthly basis

Numbers courtesy of Nielsen Mobile (this report is from July 2008). The numbers aren't perfect, but they illustrate the point: 

Now when you consider that you're building an app or a mobile application above, who is your target audience? Is it the 254 million people? The 144 million people that sometimes text or might use the mobile internet? Or are you thinking of the 40 million people that actively use the mobile web? My estimation here is that these numbers are considerably higher today. You can follow that mobile internet usage has followed Moore's laws.  However, this piece isn't just about mobile. It's about technology and marketing in general, especially digital. 

Let me provide one more example. I an a Wii adopter. However, I am not a Wii integrator. I play on the Wii a few times a month (at best). My four year old plays on the Wii almost daily. He is an integrator and, frankly/sadly, knows how to play it better than I for most games, sans Tecmo Bowl. If you were trying to reach me via a Wii channel or the like, probably not a good way to reach me as a marketer. 

Integration is an active opportunity for marketing. Adoption feels like a false number today. Though I recognize that this is a numbers game and audience segmentation exercise. I believe it's worth the effort. More importantly, you might be able to development something more meaningful for that respective segment. 

The next time that you are presented with technology adoption, ask the question how many people have integrated the technology to the point of "they can't live without it". When they say they can't live without it, you know they have deep integration.

follow me on twitter @marty_b 

Quick side note: Been enjoying the holiday season. Ready to get back to blogging at least weekly, not weakly. Sorry for the delayed posts. 

AP will never win lawsuit against Google

In 2009, the Associated Press has threatened legal battles to news aggregators, including folks like Google and Yahoo. In an NY Times article, it stated "A.P. executives said they were concerned about a variety of news forums around the Web, including major search engines like Google and Yahoo and aggregators like the Drudge Report that link to news articles, smaller sites that sometimes reproduce articles whole, and companies that sell packaged news feeds." The AP will never win this lawsuit.

The reason the AP will never win this lawsuit has nothing to do with Google or Yahoo's indexing practices. It has to do with the way that writers are utilizing social media. Today I see articles and writers are starting to include "live Twitter feeds" to social media outlets or tweeting out links to specific written posts. They are profiting from the use, sales, reuse of social media and they are not licensing it. Yet they are profiting from the indexing, links and so forth from the social media outlets. On the right, you can see how an article in the Cincinnati Enquirer has links back to Twitter updates and search terms. Obviously, practices such as this only further convolutes that debate, one which I do not believe the courts are well-suited to handle.

While I'm not surprised by the overall practice of linking to Twitter feeds, including individuals or search terms, the more the adoption spreads of the practice the less legal grounds the AP will have to stand on in the court of law. It's a murky area. Google and Yahoo are attributing correctly, simply not sending users to their (news outlet) site where news sites are profiting from advertising. While newspapers are utilizing social media and search engines to push their content out, for survival, they are simply making commoditizing their own content. It's an interesting path to extinction the AP is on and the court of law can't protect the AP. 

follow me on twitter @marty_b

Social media or Tagliabue's exit: Which impacted the NFL more?

Has social media changed the NFL image? Absolutely.The image of the NFL and the players have certainly taken a rash of negative feedback in the press in the past few years. Every missed step, misdemeanor and speeding ticket will end up being reported by news outlets everywhere, including social media. The Washington Post has a database dedicated to tracking such violations. However, I noticed a serious increase in these reports starting in late 2006. Was it the rise of citizen jounalism accompanied by social accountability? I do not believe these are not the only catalysts. The exit of former commissioner Paul Tagliabue had as much to do with the negative impact as the rise of citizen journalism. When Paul Tagliabue left the league, he took with it the last standing fortress of the "old boy network". Tags left Goodell with the responsibility of being socially accountable and figuring out how to handle the new world of journalism. Tags' exit took the last of the NFL relationship domination with major news outlets and networks, which had as much impact as the changing world of journalism powered by technology.

Before I get into specifics about this piece, let me be the first to say: "I don't live in a glasshouse." I feel for the men in the NFL. I have personally known a couple NFL players, ex-players now. Their lives aren't peachy-keen. Wealth is not everything. These men live under a microscope. People prey upon them, from their life-long friends to the person at the local bar. Their lives are difficult. We can sit, on our couches, and think they have it easy. However these guys are the ultimate specialists. They focus on the same task, day after day. I admire anyone that works that hard at a singular goal. This piece isn't about demonizing players, it's about how Tags' relationships protected the NFL. When he left, Goodell had the incumbent responsibility of dealing with those exiting relationships and the rise of citizen journalism.

In 2003, Paul Tagliabue had an ESPN program canned. It was called Playmakers. It was about boys behaving badly. Phil Taylor of SI described some of the plotlines, err headlines, better than anyone in his 2003 article, NFL should worry about the real-life misdeeds that spawned Playmakers. He wrote, "One of the star players gives a false report to police after a murder outside a nightclub. Ray Lewis, anyone?

A running back gets in legal trouble for allegedly assaulting his wife. Tampa Bay running back Michael Pittman is living that one in real life.

A player gets pulled over by the cops while driving with drugs in his car. Funny, the same thing happened to William Green of the Cleveland Browns two weeks ago.

Steroid-using players start to sweat when it appears they might get caught. The four Oakland Raiders who reportedly tested positive for THG, Bill Romanowski, Barret Robbins, Dana Stubblefield and Chris Cooper, can probably relate to that one."

A USA Today piece describes Tags' handling of the incident rather succinctly. "...Over the years, he's shown he can play smash-mouth football. Tagliabue thought ESPN's risqué dramatic series Playmakers gave NFL players a bad rap in 2003. So he went over the head of the network to its corporate parent Disney and confronted ex-CEO Michael Eisner. ESPN canceled the series after 11 episodes."

In other acts of relationship power, Tags accomplished the following (excerpt from Wikipedia):

• No players' strikes or lockouts during Tagliabue's term, an accomplishment unmatched by any of the other current commissioners. He made it a priority to develop a strong relationship with the players' union and its head, Gene Upshaw, from the start of his tenure. Furthermore, in 2006, Tagliabue ended his tenure as commissioner by negotiating a new agreement with the NFL players' union that averted an uncapped year and potential labor stoppage. The agreement ensures labor peace for a few years but it remains for his successor to flesh out and build upon it in order to ensure labor peace in the long term. NFL owners have since voted to terminate the agreement after the 2010 season.
• He took a stand against the State of Arizona for refusing to establish a state holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr., like other states had done. In 1993, the Super Bowl was to be held for the first time in Arizona, but after an election, Arizona rejected establishment of a Martin Luther King state holiday. Subsequently, Tagliabue moved the Super Bowl to Pasadena.

All of these acts were relationship and money pressure directly from top of the NFL offices. While easily some of these are viewed as accomplishments, Tags exercised his relationships for the benefit of the league. In some cases, protecting the image of the brand. Something that has definitely changed on Goodell's tenure. Goodell has great power, from money and weight of the NFL, but the relationships are not like those of his predecessor. Tags had great relationships from old NFL money, like the Mara and Rooney family, to the new money, Kraft and Jones. Tags knew how to wave his influence around, but it was changing in the 2000-era. Perhaps Tags saw that the network and empire of influence the NFL had was crumbling and it was becoming bigger than him? While I don't know how he would answer that question, I would say that he saw the writing on the wall and handed over a pretty tough situation to Goodell. 

You could argue that it was Tags that started reigning things back in in the early 2000's, dubbing the league the "No Fun League". I would agree only with part of that. The rise of citizen journalism forced starting forcing the NFL to be socially accountable for its actions more so than in the past. However, there is absolutely no way the NFL would get away with controlling the media today as it once did.

In one example, what would happen today with the Leonard Little case? To jog the memory (thanks Wikipedia), "after leaving a birthday party in 1998, Little crashed into and killed Susan Gutweiler in St. Louis, Missouri. When tested, his blood alcohol level measured 0.19 percent, a level in excess of the statutory level of intoxication (0.08) in the state of Missouri. Little received 90 days in jail, four years probation and 1,000 hours of community service. From the NFL, he was suspended for 8 games."

Let's compare this to Donte Stallworth, "on the morning of March 14, 2009, a 2005 Bentley coupe driven by Stallworth struck and killed a pedestrian in Miami Beach, Florida. Stallworth was headed toward the beach when he hit Mario Reyes, 59." I don't want to demean the lives of any of the victims, but these were eerily similar crimes. In comparison, Stallworth was suspended for the 2009 season. Quite a different sentence from the league for very similar crimes.

Lastly, I'll only say that if the Ray Lewis incident occurred today, things would be different. That is not an indictment of guilt or othewise. The NFL has been forced to deal with negative publicity in an entirely new way.

Why the difference? Transparency, citizen journalism and social accountability. This is the wave of the future of society and the NFL. In fact, I would say perhaps one of the greatest moves that Tags made was his stage left. My estimation is that he acutely observed that the management style that he used to control the networks and league were on their way out. He saw that the networks of few became networks of thousands through Twitter, social media and real-time reporting.The informal relationship networks that previously helped manage the message were no longer as valuable. In today's model there is no way to control the message, to manage the image of the league. It's too much information, too fast and from too many parties. With that, he handed the baton over to Goodell.

Today, Goodell has to abide by new rules. He has done so, by mandate of the public. Credit him, he's a very smart man. The exit of Tags' relationships simply hastened the adoption of the new rules. My suggestion is that the league look at people like Chad Ochocinco and figure out how to clone him. They could grow loyalty, allowing co-creation that is part information, part technology. The future of the league isn't just about expanding the fanbase to new markets, getting more games through the NFLPA or more content on the NFL Network. It is about connecting to the fanbase in new, creative and 1:1 ways. Goodell would be well-served to figure out how to exploit the connectedness the new mediums offer. Otherwise, he's simply going to just be living by the new rules, not exploiting them. The rules certainly have changed because of technology, but they also changed when Tags took his "ol boy network" with him.

follow me on twitter @marty_b

Mobile phone etiquette on the potty, best practices while you go

You may say there is not a need for this guide, but you know there is a need for this guide. Believe it or not, I actually wish there wasn't a need for this guide, but according to a Wired article "75 percent had no objections to anyone using laptops, netbooks and cell phones in the bathroom." Though I fall to the 25 other percent, I thought I'd give some best practices if for mobile usage "while you go".

1. Hit the silent button on the keyboard/ringer. We know what you're doing. We pretend that we don't know. So help us out, keep the keyboard beeps to a minimum por favor. We don't need to know that you're banging out a master treatise while taking your constitutional.
2. If you are surfing the web reading textsfromlastnight.com or failblog.org, keep giggling to a minimum.
3. May as well cover the talking thing. I consider talking while in a public restroom tantamount to going with the door open. I did this when I was in the military, no real duty to do this today. I prefer that you did not, but if you do talk:
   1. Carrying a conversation into the bathroom is more favored than striking up a new conversation or calling out. See point 3e below.
   2. Answering a call is also more forgiven than starting a new call. See point 3e below.
   3. You may not take calls, in or out, if people are waiting. House rules. See point 3e below.
   4. New outgoing calls are seriously frowned upon. See point 3e below.
   5. In any event, should you encounter other people during any of your bathroom journey; we ask that you hold your phone by tilting your head to your shoulder type thing. We all know what just went on, but we don't want to believe that your dirty nubs were all over your phone.
   6. You cannot tell the other party of your presence in bathroom. It's like peeing the lake when boating, everyone might do it. We just don't want to know about it.
4. It can be awkward for a courtesy flush while talking, we all understand. Therefore, you must mute, hit pause or hold or call them back momentarily. It's really a benefit to everyone, immediate company included.
5. Beyond simply the courtesy flush, you are still required to flush. No exceptions. Uno y dos, you're still required to flush. If you follow the Brocode, you know what rule that you'll also need to follow.
6. Commit to a hand. You can't swap hands for swiping, wiping and/or aiming purposes while you are midstream or otherwise.
7. If you are wearing headphones into the bathroom, co-workers I have seen this, you may not touch them or your mobile device within the site of others. I consider this confusing and disorienting to other people in the facilities.
8. You must still wash your hands. Don't do the running water over the hands like I'm the cleanest thing in the bathroom routine either. Soap, hot water and towels must be used, by you.
9. When exiting the restroom, you must quietly let your other party know that you need just a moment. Then you must do the following. Though I could describe it, there's a much better line in The Godfather that Clemeza said to Michael Corleone. "Just let your hand drop to your side and the gun slip out. Everyone will still think you've got it. They're gonna be staring at your face, Mike. So walk out of the place real fast, but you don't run. Don't look nobody directly in the eye, hut don't look away either." In this case, it's not a gun, but rather your mobile device.
10. If you drop your phone in urine water, you are permitted to retrieve it. Though you must tell friends about said incident. If you drop in any other situation, you must buy a new phone. Flush it away, away. That's the risk you take. No exceptions. If you need to repair your phone from the urine incident, see this site.
11. It's OK to wipe off your phone with a towel, though people may think that is weird. When you return to your desk or other safe environment, it's required to add some sanitizer to the mix.

Like I said earlier, I wish these did not need to be stated. Yet, they do. Have a horror story about this? Be sure to share in the comments below.

Follow me on twitter @marty_b

More stories on the subject:

Stats: http://www.virtualpressoffice.com/publicsiteContentFileAccess/112095/112095.html/?fileContentId=112095&fileName=112095.html&fromOtherPageToDisableHistory=Y

http://www.websavey.com/viewpost.cfm/1/43734/ (pretty foul)

http://randomactsofunkindness.blogspot.com/2007/08/cell-phone-and-public-bathroom.html