Being Peter Kim

More on social media and socialism

Stowe Boyd says that I've gotten into a conflated muddle with thinking on why social media isn't socialism.

I disagree.

To Boyd's post, there's little "shared meritocratic ethos" in today's web; for example, I'm feeling a lot of heat around the idea of getting paid, e.g. Izea and Twply, not to mention Twitter phishing.

In contrast, Jon Burg gets straight to the point about why a complete shift of power to the people should and will not occur.

I wrote it before and I'll publish again - social media isn't socialism.

Socialism, from the wikipedia definition, describes a situation with (1) collective ownership of means of production and distribution along with (2) an egalitarian distribution of wealth.  

(1) Each participant chooses their own publishing tools and distribution channels.  Investing too heavily in a common system produces negative results, as pointed out by Steve Rubel describing Robert Scoble's diminished brand value.

(2) You and I may share content freely, but not for others to take credit for our thoughts and ideas.  If an individual consistently produces valuable content, that person should be rewarded, not ripped off.  Plagiarizers redistribute "wealth" by stealing from owners and claiming value as their own.

Individuals need incentive to participate.  Competition drives innovation.  Cooperation helps sub-groups succeed together.

Did I stutter?

Social media isn't socialism

If you've started blogging, photosharing, or tweeting to any extent, then you've witnessed firsthand the "social" nature of social media.  Individuals post opinions and ideas, share emotions, and exchange thoughts on topics ranging from mundane to profound.

As for me, I love LOLcats as much as I love social psychology.  Socializing increases the value of content.  The channels may have a feedback mechanism, but they're worthless unless put to use.

However, socializing shouldn't be confused with socialism, although some principles seem to apply.  For example, social computing has facilitated a transfer of power from traditional media institutions to a widely distributed base of smaller beacons, typically individuals.

But individuals need incentive to participate.  And the incentive they seek is typically not monetary.  It's more often activation of the feedback channel - that others agree, disagree, share, favorite their content.  The system requires individual ownership and authorship to work effectively.

When someone plagiarizes content, the social system breaks down.  Individuals who plagiarize seek to claim credit for themselves.   Social media is already social and a Robin Hood-style redistribution of value isn't required.  But credit and attribution remain key to socializing and increasing the value of content for everyone involved.

So, political scientists, where does social media end up then?

• We share ideas in the commons, but seek individual credit, which isn't communism.  Not all blogs are created equal.
• We participate in content aggregators like Alltop, Social Media Today, and Social Computing Magazine, but retain personal ownership, which isn't quite socialism.  
• We compete with others by publishing individual blogs or photostreams, but also distribute freely and encourage others to share, remix, and improve upon the original, which isn't quite capitalism.

What I can tell you is that it's important to give credit where credit is due.  And while we may find ourselves in the midst of a power shift from institutions to individuals, social media may thrive on socialization, but it isn't socialism.

Hey! nielsen beta

So as my media consumption diary tells me, I watch a lot of TV.  And just in time for the start of fall TV season, I've gotten started on Hey! nielsen - in the company's words, "part opinion engine, part social network, and part buzz tracker."

From what I can tell, if Nielsen can get critical mass here it could be the social news arbiter of the entertainment industry.  Face it, digg is best for tech geeks.  Lipstick is for the celebrity obsessed.  These sites work best around a long tail issue.

Until the site opens to the public, you can read the blog, subscribe to their YouTube vids, join their Facebook group, friend them on MySpace, and follow them on Twitter.  That's a lot of social media - mostly for marketing - and all the value is in the community being created.

The Media Consumption Diary

Earlier this year, Jeremiah posted about his media consumption diet.  I had a follow up idea in mind for about seven months and finally got around to it last week - the media consumption diary.

In my response to Jeremiah's post, I thought about my use of/exposure to (mostly) measured media channels.  For the past week, I have been keeping a diary of time spent with media.  What follows is a totally mundane post, so before I lose you, here's the value:

• Keep track of your own patterns using a spreadsheet like this one.  It's tough!
• Don't update more than 2 - 3 times a day; you'll likely bias your consumption.
• If you are a marketer - think about your diet vis-a-vis that of your average consumer.  Then recognize the biases that exist from your own habits and be aware when planning media in the future.

Here's my media consumption diary from the past week:

1. Internet:  35 hours (46%).  Mostly during the day at work, but also multi-tasking with TV at home/night.  Can't remember any ads I saw.
2. Outdoor:  17 hours (23%).  Some while commuting, but mostly while at sporting events.  I went to at&t park and Fenway Park (where the Red Sox beat the Yankees 10 - 1).  I remember at&t messages all over at&t and Covidien, CVS, and F.W. Webb in Fenway.  Although I feel outdoor ads are quite unengaging, brute force repetition gets the recall job done, I guess.
3. TV:  17 hours (22%).  Almost all while multitasking in the evening with a computer.  Except during last Sunday's football game.  Can't remember any ads.
4. Mobile:  4 hours (5%).  Usually while commuting, so counted most of these as multitasking with outdoor.  Can't remember any ads, although most content I use doesn't have any.
5. Radio:  2 hours (3%).  I don't spend nearly as much time with the radio as I did when I owned a car.
6. Print:  1 hour (1%).  This number surprised me the most.  I picked up a Boston Herald on Monday to read about the Patriots - Jets game.  I had this week's copies of Adweek and Ad Age, skimmed to make sure I didn't miss anything via RSS.
7. Direct mail:  0 hours (0%).  Other members of my household take care of it before I can.

What's a "typical" week?  I don't think one exists for me.

The media consumption diet

Jeremiah Owyang, part of the Media 2.0 Workgroup, posted on his media consumption diet.  Chris Saad and Brian Keith followed his lead.  The commonalities aren't too surprising - lots of internet, little traditional media.

What's notable is the fact that these early adopters are engaged with media channels in inverse relationship to the amount of advertising money being spent therein.  In other words, they're spending the most time where the least amount of advertising dollars are focused.

According to TNS Media Intelligence, through the first nine months of 2006, here's how media spend looks:

• TV: $47 billion
• Magazines: $21 billion
• Newspapers: $20 billion
• Radio: $8 billion
• Internet: $7 billion

But this disconnect doesn't end with early adopters.  Forrester data shows that the media mix of North American households ranks roughly in this order: TV, Internet, radio, newspapers, magazines.

Looks like we're in for more shifting in 2007.  How do you think this year's upfronts will play out?  Some companies are going to be like Kevin Bacon in Footloose - the part where he's playing chicken but can't veer off the road because his shoelaces are stuck.  Consumer behavior has made the shift to internet from TV unavoidable - they've tied companies to the gas pedal with no choice but to keep on going.

So for my "diet"?

• Primarily PC-based internet.  Mostly RSS for news, some web sites are regulars.  Only a few e-mail marketing lists.
• Mobile internet.  Work makes Blackberry a must, so I'm chained to a clunky UI.  Lots of RSS here, too.
• TV.  All the shows I catch on DVR are from Fox and ABC.  Or ESPN.  Hint - avoid commercials, just tune in 12 - 15 minutes after the show starts.  Later towards the end of the season.
• Magazines.  Lots of subscriptions, never read them.  See RSS, above.
• Newspapers.  Ibid.
• Radio.  None.  Want to save the environment?  Don't buy a hybrid.  Sell your car and use public transportation instead.  But doing so comes at the expense of radio time, which can of course be replaced with podcasts.
• Outdoor.  Typically ignored as much as possible.  There's much better stuff being done outside the US.

So - what's in your diet?

Google is better to work for than You

Lewis Green points out that Google wins Fortune's best company to work for in 2007.

"You" didn't make the list.

Yard sales on the CGM halfpipe

Great post from Mark Cuban this weekend about the long tail and its vert ramp.  Content needs to be filtered into commercial vs. personal buckets - in the case of the former, denizens of the long tail face a steep incline.  The first step?  Get paid at least once for your work - that gets you "out of the long tail of the long tail."

Cuban's analysis is dead on with my feelings about the impending backlash in CGM.  Users will get smart about the social computing sell-out process and their critical role therein:

Web 2.0 company launches...

1. Attracts users with clean interface and authentic community
2. Builds momentum as users create content and invite others
3. User base is commercialized and property is sold.  Users get nothing - not even a "thank you" let alone a rev share.
4. Experience becomes cluttered as marketers enter sites, trying to reach "hot" demographics
5. Migrate to next site...repeat from step 1.

Look at how MySpace has become the domain of over 35ers, not coveted 18-24 year old tastemakers.

When will a business model emerge that rewards users - and not only for their individual contributions, but also for the efforts of the entire community?  And when will users demand compensation for their efforts?

Joe Biden - uh oh

Keep an eye out for this one.  To quote Senator Joseph Biden (D-Delaware) from this C-Span clip:

"You cannot go to a 7/11 or a Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking."

Watch how the clip ends with the Senator's hands on top of both shoulders of the Indian man he's addressing.  I'm no body language expert, but this is a PERFECT example of microinequities at work.

Not too much yet on BlogPulse, but Technorati is growing quickly.  It will be interesting to see if this gets to the point of Swift Boats and Thurmond's Birthday...

Tags: joe biden  :: Add to del.icio.us

MSM and CGM must co-exist

From this independent's perspective, CGM is better at covering "newsworthy" events in Europe and Asia and our public acumen needs to sharpen in the U.S.  We'll clearly benefit from the combination of MSM + CGM, but not for another couple of years - watch for a boost in 2008 with election coverage.

UPDATE:  Case in point:  The WSJ reports at 11:38 am that Enron founder Kenneth Lay died today after being admitted to the ER at 3:10 am.  Many blogs referencing CNN.  The AP appears to have published the story first at 10:39 am.  However, MSM sticks to facts while blogs certainly adding color from both the left and the right.

I consider myself an political independent, closer to being apolitical than affiliated with either major U.S. party.  As a quick reference check, I took this quiz and landed right in the middle.  If anything, I'd like to see the Purple Party emerge.  This is what growing up in red states and going to school + making a living in blue states will do to you.

So I enjoy listening to both NPR and WEEI in the mornings and watch both Fox News and CNN.  I don't really read news blogs, but notice in particular when stories cross-over from the blogosphere to the mainstream and vice versa.

Most recently, stories from blog to mainstream were AOL disconnect and sleeping Comcast technician.  Yesterday, it was a report on North Korea's missile test on Boing Boing.  With three updates.

It strikes me that big stories from the blogosphere end up on the news - usually in the back half of the program before sports and after local interest stories like "Raccoon Caught In Chimney."  Really big stories - ones with global impact - always break first in MSM.

As media organizations continue to morph and adjust to Web 2.0, clearly local and regional outlets need to embrace the change most, with national and global outlets feeling less impact but adapting as well.

Tags: media  :: Add to del.icio.us

Minority Report at O'Hare

So there's print and online - now there's outdoor and online.  Mediapost reports that Accenture is sponsoring an interactive touchscreen up at Chicago's O'Hare Airport.  It's being developed by Schematic, who participated in the conceptual design of the crazy computer in the film Minority Report.

Schematic's executive creative director, Dale Herigstad, outlines a model of media distances/personal space:

• 20 feet or more:  "public" or "outdoor" media (e.g. things like billboards)
• 10 - 20 feet:  friends and family (e.g. TV)
• About 2 feet:  personal (e.g. computers)
• Less than 1 foot:  private (e.g. personal devices like iPods)

Assuming these distances are for people in the U.S., no word on how these distances would be shortened for Europeans or extended for Asians.

Tags: schematic, advertising, ooh :: Add to del.icio.us

NYT and MSFT planning to help luddites bridge the gap

Microsoft and the New York Times have announced plans for a new technology that makes reading a newspaper online more like reading a newspaper offline.  Using features in Vista, The Times Reader will offer emulation such as "turning" pages and offline reading capability.

No more newsprint fingers - but at least the paper doesn't have a battery that will die on you.  And laptops make for expensive flyswatters or impromptu rain shields.  But maybe die hards who refuse to read news online will finally convert, while the rest of us move beyond RSS.  Personally, I'd like to see some sort of superaggregation go mainstream.

Subscriptions are currently anticipated to run more expensive than a regular print subscription.  It will be interesting to see how this changes access to nyt.com - which you can cache already.  The Times Reader will have to go beyond TimesSelect and offer more value.  This is a great opportunity for advertisers though and can spark a revival in print ads, especially if the offline/online buys can be integrated.

Tags: times reader, nyt :: Add to del.icio.us

Tactics to make online TV ads matter

So ABC has figured out how to launch a business model for ad-supported TV online.  Advertisers sound intrigued by the promise of "non-skippable" ad breaks.  Consumers might actually watch the ads, as they'll be delivered in non-traditional formats.

Hard core fans will definitely be lured in by the chat wrappers around the shows (if they're usable) - and ironically, we can expect "scheduled time-shifting" as groups will meet online to discuss a show, "e.g. did you catch that Dharma logo?"  Call it the Web 2.0 version of a book club.

So now it's time to innovate.  Hopefully advertisers will take advantage of their "secondary buys" and thus realize the opportunity to integrate with digital properties.  This vehicle offers the PERFECT opportunity for integration and "see what happens" type integration.  Viewers will be multitasking anyway during the ad breaks they can't skip, so they might as well be sent to your web site.  Great opportunity for behavioral targeting in web mail for visitors taking a break from TV - make sure the content integrates with the show and you've got a home run.

Another opportunity - offer fanatics access to shows before they air on the East Coast for a premium.  It will matter.

To guarantee ad impressions - and infuriate consumers - networks should integrate required click targets within ads to advance the content.  If it's delivered for free - then the value exchange seems fair enough.

Tags: tv, advertising :: Add to del.icio.us