YOU - The Newest YOU - The Newest Communications Channel

All right, get ready for a long one… I’m breaking the bloggers rule of short and sweet – damn the consequences. Proceed at your own risk.

I’m a bit of a privacy freak - particularly when it comes to digital privacy. I don’t have anything in particular to hide, just something I inherited from my family. I believe that each individual has a right to privacy (unless they break the law) and should be able to control that privacy. I’m posting this blog, so choosing to give up a bit of my own privacy, in hopes to make a handful of people more aware, ask tough questions, and take some form of action, be it educating your children, having a water cooler discussion, changing your online behavior or service provider, or contacting your elected officials. So what does this have to do with channels?

Today, most of our media channels are, or are becoming interactive. We watch CNN and Twitter our favorite talking head. We post comments to blogs. We update our Facebook page, email & text. If you are part of the Google Voice Beta, you can let Google transcribe your phone messages into an email, creating a voice to text, cross channel communication. In effect, YOU and ME are creating a new user generated content (UGC) channel – The You Channel. We no longer use the Web to simply read information, we also create Web content via social networks, blogs, uploaded photos, FarmVille purchases, Second Life simulations, emails and now phone transcripts.

The companies enabling, hosting, and transacting this very cool technology track everything we do, and now with GPS-enabled mobile devices, can track where we go and help us find our friends (and enemies). This allows them to deliver targeted content and ads, so you and I are more likely to open our wallets or keep coming back. The better the user targeting, the higher the ROI and the premium ad or subscription fee. I’m a marketer and a consumer. I appreciate getting stuff that interests me am more likely to spend my limited marketing dollars delivering ads/content to someone more likely to care about my product. In fact, (and as a disclaimer) my company offers software that can enable this level of targeting for mobile Web services. We have chosen to do so in a way that can gives the user or business control over what personal data is collected, shared, and with whom. But, I digress…

You’ve heard the phrase, “He who controls the information, has the power.” Well companies, like Google, have become very good at what they do, and have become very powerful indeed. That leads to new customers, such as the US Government, and new uses for their technology and services. What is just becoming clear to many people is exactly what those alternative uses are. Just like anything, this information can be used for good or evil. From a practical perspective, there is simply too much data for the average person to maliciously use it.

So, what about the non-average person or powerful organization? http://gawker.com/5419271/google-ceo-secrets-are-for-filthy-people ValleyWag blogger, Ryan Tate, editorializes on a recent CNBC interview with Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, expressing his concerns over how this data is used:

An interesting follow-up by Julie Bort appeared on Network World’s GoogleSubnet:

http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/48975?source=NWWNLE_nlt_daily_am_2009-12-14

And a third by Robert Hansen at Internet Evolution:

http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?doc_id=185755&f_src=ieupdate

This one is really worth reading the comments, as it gives a balanced view of the impact on You and Me of user generated content.

Are you still with me?

Lets roll back the clock to 1982. If I only read the comics and obituaries for a month, nobody knew and nobody cared. If I bought a book, nobody cared except my local bookseller who might want to recommend something similar the next time I stopped by. Fast forward to 2009. Now, it is possible to know the specific comic or obituary I read and every book I buy, along with any review or comment I write. I am, whether I like it or not, a contributing member of The YOU Channel every time I search, post, buy or social network.

Why is this relevant? Because there is a huge lack of context behind this data. Am I researching a novel, seeing if the body I dumped in the river has been identified, or just quirky? The book I bought, was it for me – or perhaps a gift? True story: Back in the 80’s I started receiving Soldier of Fortune and a SWAT supply catalog. It took me awhile to figure out why somebody thought I cared about knives hidden in belt buckles, but best I could determine, I bought The Anarchists Cookbook for a friend who was thinking about writing a novel and needed some background information. It was a Christmas present and not relevant to my personal interests – or behavior. Okay – that was a marketing targeting error, but my point is that if this happened today, I would likely end up on a terrorist watch list and unbeknownst to me, have all my electronic and telephonic communications monitored by Uncle Sam, courtesy of Google, Microsoft or Barnes & Noble. This month Yahoo has actually been testifying to the FTC on just these digital privacy issues. (BTW, check out Kara Swisher’s Ethics Statement. This is how it should be done.)

And that is my other point. Political commentary aside, consider the military contracts with Blackwater to run operations and provide security. It seems a logical extension that our intelligence services would also contract with our communications channel companies to provide data collection and monitoring services. The telephone carriers have revenue-generating programs available to law-enforcement for just this purpose – with online access to track a mobile user’s location. Unlike wire-tapping, the details are fuzzy about how access to this information is granted. It’s a brave new world out there, so Web poster and cell phone user, or should I say, “youser”, beware.

Okay, before I start sounding too much like a conspiracy theorist – I am actually, a reasonably trusting person - it is the shifting role of media from watchdog to watcher that has me concerned. It should have you concerned, too. The migration of broadcast media to digital, interactive media has transformed what you and I say and do into a youser-generated public channel. We generate the content, but we don’t really control its distribution (ever use a Facebook application?). Our technological advances, particularly in the area of communications technology ALWAYS have a huge social impact – paper and ink, typewriters, the printing press, the telephone, radio, television, the computer, the internet. All have been socially transforming and all have lead to enhanced mass communications – the media channels, as we know them today.

Historically, our media channels played a key role in holding the government, businesses and powerful individuals accountable for their actions. Media companies took this role seriously and applied balanced judgment, not strictly profit-based judgment. Rarely was information taken out of context or someone tried in the court of public opinion to create a titillating headline or sound bite. In short, responsible journalism was the standard.

In today’s society, profits and “the scoop” seem to trump common sense and getting the facts right. Ethical lines have blurred and are justified because, technically, it’s legal. Everyone is a citizen journalist. Once it’s out – it’s difficult to tell what is fact or opinion – spoof or truth. You Channel content can have a lingering affect on persons and organizations, both positive and negative. Education and legislation is woefully behind these technology advances. And as content and market capitalization have shown, there is clearly a tremendous need for personal expression and sharing.

The YOU Channel is here to stay – love it or hate it. So, youser, beware and think twice about what you share, what you say. Contribute responsibly and hope your online neighbor does the same. The only one watching your back is you (and 6,803,370,061* billion of your closest friends).

*US Census Bureau worldwide population

I just read a very thought provoking article by Jordan Golson of GigaOm entitled: "Book Publisher: e-Books Will Be Our Downfall."

It got me thinking about how technology has changed our personal behavior and along with that, our distribution channels for certain goods & services. E-Books and E-Readers, such as the Kindle, along with distribution "centers" such as Amazon for books or Apple iTunes Store for music, add convenience to the buying process, but they also alter the experience. Sometimes this is good, sometimes, not so much.

What value do they bring beyond price & convenience? Do they market - sort of. They provide a search/discovery tool and can make suggestions based upon what other buyers who have purchased the same movie, book or music have also purchased. They provide a place for users to rate creative content, but most people don't bother taking the time. They don't coordinate book signings. They don't provide book editing services. They don't provide demographic data to writers to help them with plots or sales. There data is different & their resources are limited. Distributors have always had amazing databases. It's just easier to access them now, but it is equally as useful online or off.

There is certainly more that these e-distributors can do, but it doesn't spell the end of book publishing as we know it. It does mean the the book publishers need to do a better job of communicating the value they bring to the writer, the distributor, the retailer (or e-tailer) and the reader. People abandon behavior when it no longer serves any purpose. Book publishing is not dead. Book distribution has transformed and will likely continue its transformation. What happens to book publishers is up to the publishers. Doing nothing gives innovators a chance to gain ground. If they innovate in-house and offer valuable services (and effectively communicate them) to all their constituents then the prognosis is pretty good.

e-books are not our downfall unless they completely replace printed media. Remember, e-books can't be shoved in a back pocket, they don't like water, sunscreen and sand, you can't write in the margins and you can't show-off your first edition Mastering the Art of French Cooking or your author's signed copy of The Mouse the Roared. And, didn't Captain Kirk receive a copy of The Tale of Two Cities (leatherbound) as a birthday gift in The Wrath of Kahn." What year was that???

Life is rich. Life has texture. Television didn't kill radio nor do I believe e-readers will kill off publishing and all printed media. If the printed book dies it's not because of technology, it's because of societal changes in what's valued. Format is format - everyone likes something a little different, but the process of publishing has much more depth than just distribution. If we forget that, then the book publishers are the least of worries.

Just one gal's opinion...

Mobile TV - Are we making it harder than it needs to be?

I just finished reading the Juniper Research blog by Dr. Windsor Holden about mobile TV standards. My favorite part is about how a new standard has just been adopted, but there is not a single phone that supports it. Each carrier/cable company tries their own version & none have done particularly well.

Maybe it's time to look at what is already there. The Web. All smartphones already have an HTTP browser. And I suspect most phones (for anyone wishing to access data services) will have a Web (vs. carrier-only) browser within the next few years. The Web is a ready-to-use distribution channel for all kinds of media formats & content. And while bandwidth and performance remain an issue if everything was to turn on (in mass) today, they are steadily improving. Current mobile TV adoption rates - at least here in the US - are so low, that I don't see the Internet crashing from too much mobile TV viewing, anytime soon.

Media players already exist for PC/laptop TV viewers. Perhaps its time to look at mobilizing the technology that is already accepted by consumers of online media and put as much effort and funding into mobilizing existing standards vs. each carrier and cable company trying to create it's own unique distribution channel and supporting technology.

I'm all for innovative, disruptive technology and I'm not suggesting that these companies shouldn't innovate. I just think they need to look beyond their own doors to a world of possibilities that are designed to be used by the masses and not just one company or one set of customers. IPTV, in whatever form it takes, has a much better chance of mass adoption than any closed network solution. It can be previewed by everyone, but monetized via subscriptions or pay-per-view. It can be connected for billing/analysis to any back-end infrastructure accessible via SOA and a Web connection.

Sometimes the simple answers are the best...

Handset App Stores

Just read this blog from Juniper Research - and the trend continues. Mobile application distribution is moving well out of the hands of the wireless carriers and traditional e-tailers like Handango. A company such as Handango can offer cross-platform support, something that will appeal to many enterprises. But for a consumer, why does an iPhone user need to go anywhere but Apple for application discovery. The same holds true for Nokia/Symbian, RIM, and Microsoft. Will Google become an application distributor for Android? If I have multiple devices (desktop, laptop, netbook, two phones)- where can I consolidate my browsing and purchasing activities?

One thing is for sure, that the speed of change in the mobile computing products, services and distribution is evolving exponentially faster than its PC predecessor.

Digital Distribution - All Things Must Change

Back in the 80’s, as a computer products distributor we utilized Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) with our large customers such as Toys R Us, Sears and NYNEX, but just the data, not the applications were transferred. Then came the software kiosks – which, after several aborted attempts really never stuck, although some game vendors had a little bit of luck with them. Then came email and the Internet, and several more attempts were made to distribute software under the ASP model, accessed through VPN’s and other application interfaces. Finally, Web 2.0 arrived and software downloads, SaaS and Web services have become commonplace.

Mobile is going through the same evolution, albeit in a much compressed timeframe. First the only applications you could access were those deemed worthy by the carriers and delivered via their walled garden networks. On the enterprise side, handheld computer software, such as that used by UPS or FedEx were provisioned by IT. Up until last year, most Palm and Windows Mobile users downloaded software to their PCs and copying them to their PDAs via a mini-USB or proprietary tether or docking solution. Now nearly every application can be downloaded directly to your smartphone over the Web using your HTTP browser.

Two and half years ago, my partner & I were challenged by IT professionals and investors that no one would download software to a mobile device, even thought the carriers’ top data services money makers were ringtones and wallpapers. Today, downloads have become commonplace. So commonplace that it is forever altering the software distribution channel. I can download mobile apps from Google and Yahoo. I visit the Apple Store for music and iPhone applications. The wireless carriers continue to offer software downloads ranging from ringtones to television programming to personal navigation apps and services. Microsoft and Intel are executing on or planning online software distribution centers for their certified applications, ala Apple.

Software has traditionally offered higher margins than hardware to the entire value chain. With shorter product lifecycles, a multitude of platforms and devices and dropping prices, the traditional method of packaged software distribution is rapidly coming to a close. Will the traditional computer products distributors concede all software sales to these new players or will they find new value to add and restructure their services to reduce disintermediation? As an ISV, I can sell directly to the consumer, electronically manage downloads, licenses and updates – why do I need a traditional distributor or retailer? Software distribution logistics and infrastructure has taken on a new meaning in the last 3 years. The shift is well underway and I’m curious to see who will remain in software distribution.

Regardless of your politics, President Obama is right to include digital infrastructure in the national infrastructure rebuilding priority. Software, music, television, movies, phone calls, pictures, maps, curriculum and even equipment service updates are just a fraction of the data, services and content being distributed via a digital distribution channel.

Women In Cable Technology - "Tech it Out" Conference

This week I had the opportunity to attend WICT’s Tech It Out conference in Denver. I was amazed with the by the parallels between the cable and satellite operator’s challenges and strategic decisions and those faced by that of the computing industry. In the end, everyone is trying to figure out how best to utilize “the Web” as a distribution channel for content – be it user generated, television, music or motion picture. Issues such as contextual advertising, data privacy, digital rights management (DRM), and supporting a mobile world are all top on the list. The acronyms were different but the general meaning and underlying principles were all the same.

What is clear is that AoIP (anything over IP) – seems to be the best distribution approach when trying to reach customers on multiple devices. So while optimizing content presentation for different devices will likely require multiple distribution channels (open and closed networks), it seems clear that the Web will play an important role for getting cable content out of the living room and onto our laptops and smartphones.

While I was a bit of a conference outsider - mobile SaaS vs. cable industry, I was joined by cross-over vendor Sling Media) and a panel was exclusively set aside to discuss the happenings at CES. The bottom line - it is clear that many of the solutions to achieve the cable industries goals will be enabled by technologies born in the computer products and Internet sectors.

I had the chance to sit in on sessions and chat with cable operators, such as Time-Warner Cable and Comcast. They have some exciting new things coming our way so get ready to hit the sofa, or your desk, or the commuter train, and enjoy the ride that is coming!