“The evocative pipes of Elvis, lingering shots of five impossibly pulchritudinous young ‘uns in underwear wafting around an impossibly beautiful house. A cross between Idol and Big Brother, the show–the first to be streamed via the Internet on Hulu– follows a wannabe model, three actors and a musician as they try to make it big in the town of Tinsel. The social media presence is overwhelming. You can tweet, FB, MySpace, blog and sms the quintet and, if one of them should make it big, vote to choose their replacement.”

What’s interesting about this show is that, at the moment, it is entirely digital. In addition to episodes airing on Hulu, it has a highly interactive web site that allows you to watch the house live, 24-7, from the point of view of over 50 cameras. You can track the individual cast members and dynamically follow them as they move throughout the house, focus on a single room, or just watch the producer’s selection of the most interesting things happening at the moment.

So what does it mean?

The world’s becoming digital

Five years ago, or even one year ago, there’s no question that this show would have been launched in partnership with a major television network. But as all forms of entertainment become increasingly digital, it makes more sense to publish the show online. Producer Michael Herwick breaks it down:

“[Young people] digest the internet, they’re socially interactive, and they’re shooting their own videos on YouTube and getting discovered. We’re just saying that’s where it’s at right now, and we’re creating a project around that.”

This approach seems to resonate with the target demographic. A few commenters on a Perez Hilton post discussing the show say:

“I always watch American Idol on line.. These days people don’t watch TV.. Unless there’s no internet..” -evancalo
“I fucking LOVE HULU! Down with paying for cable!” -holyfuck

Celebrity requires interaction

“Someone tweet me and tell me what I should do” – Giglianne, the aspiring model.

I am not a fan of reality shows, but because of my husband’s involvement, I’ve been tuning into the site periodically. And the moment that hooked me was when, on the day the cast moved in, they all sat around a television that was showing live Twitter comments and questions directed at them. The cast immediately began to interact with the fans – making shout-outs, answering questions, and just chatting. This level of interactivity allows for fans to be more than just a passive audience, and that decision was made by design:

“I am determined to continue challenging convention and pushing the boundaries of mainstream entertainment. The next frontier is the video world of authentic real-time interaction. ‘If I Can Dream’ experiments with technology to provide for the first time a complete open-door opportunity that allows the viewer to experience reality in a way never before attempted.” – Simon Fuller

Modern day celebrities are increasingly interacting with their fans – just look at all the celebs on Twitter. It’s interesting to think that, in years to come, this type of interaction and a sense of responsibility towards fans might become standard.

Always-on entertainment

Another interesting aspect of the show is that it’s always on. The 30-minute Hulu program is really only a small piece of the overall effort. Producer Michael Herwick describes Fuller’s vision:

“I think Simon’s vision was to give people complete access into what it really takes to try to make it in Hollywood. He said that nobody’s ever shown that world in a legitimate sort of way, and he wanted to give complete access to it. I also think that he really loved the idea of video communication and that the whole world is so interconnected, everyone’s video chatting. It just felt like a natural fit for modern technology.”

In advertising, we talk a lot about how digital has shifted from initiative based efforts to always-on platforms. It’s interesting to think that this shift might be happening in entertainment as well.

What does it all mean?

When I was watching the site on Tuesday evening, I started to get a strange feeling. The voyeurism of watching the cast in the house- live, unfiltered- combined with their interactions with viewers on Twitter felt slightly uncomfortable (and very unfamiliar), but it was also extremely compelling. I couldn’t turn it off. It felt completely and utterly new. To throw some marketing speak into the mix, it felt like I was watching a paradigm shifting. And that’s not a feeling that I get often.

We know that digital technology has changed the ways in which we connect with one another. We know that it changes our behaviors. Now we’re seeing how it can change our very definition of, and expectations from, entertainment.

Full disclosure: My husband, a partner at Poke, led all the digital for this project. So I’ve been hearing about the show for over a year (and ate a lot of dinners alone while he worked late on it!). However, any opinions expressed here are, as always, my own.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Not too bad, right? I’ve been interested in moving to teaching and speaking more, and I don’t think this was a terrible first attempt, although there is certainly room for improvement (I say “kinda” a lot).

In case you didn’t see it before, here’s a link to the presentation itself on Slideshare.

On Monday, I gave a lecture about some trends in digital marketing and advertising that I see being important in 2010. Last night I uploaded the deck to Slideshare, and this morning I was thrilled to find that it was picked as one of the featured presentations for Slideshare today (yay!). So please take a look – I’d love to get feedback.

So was the iPad really an iFail? The first question that has to be answered is how we define success versus failure. In my mind there are two major ways to do this:

1. Is the iPad good for the technology world as a whole?
2. Will the iPad be a success for Apple?

Those are two very different questions with different answers. Let’s break it down one at a time.

1. Is the iPad good for the technology world as a whole?

Device

In defining whether or not the iPad is good for technology, we have to look at a few factors. The first, and most obvious, is the device itself. There are some interesting technical advances in the screen technology, so that it’s easy to see the screen from multiple angles. However, as lots of folks have pointed out, the iPad as a device is really little more than a big iPod Touch.

User Interface

In terms of user interface, the iPad draws largely from the conventions established in the iPhone (they even share an OS). There are some major improvements in individual applications, and the addition of the iWork suite is interesting, but there isn’t a major breakthrough as there was when the iPhone was announced. However, this lack doesn’t mean that the iPad UI won’t be extremely easy and comfortable to use.

Ecosystem

Beyond the device and its interface, there are a few areas in which I believe the iPad is much stronger. The first is the creation of a media ecosystem. The iPod didn’t really come into its own until the iTunes music store was released; same with the iPhone and the App Store. On Wednesday, we got a hint of the iPad’s ecosystem with the iBooks application, which supports book downloads in a similar manner to the Kindle. I can only assume that that marketplace will continue to grow, and will probably replace the Kindle’s (the use of ePub technology is a good sign, although from the prices shown in the demo books on the iPad will be slightly more expensive than books on the Kindle).

However, I believe that a larger opportunity is a streaming television ecosystem. Right now the iTunes Store supports TV episodes and movies, but there isn’t anything that supports free or subscription based streaming. But what about when Hulu and Netflix develop streaming video clients for the iPad, or, better yet, partner with Apple to create a network-agnostic streaming media service? That would be truly revolutionary and might be the final nail in the coffin for traditional cable TV.

Now, this is not to say that the ecosystem is ideal. Like many others, I am concerned about the fact that the all of Apple’s “stores” are closed systems. Apple, and only Apple, has complete control over what types of content and applications we can be exposed to on their devices.

You can do on the iPad only what Apple allows. And if you are allowed to do something, you have to go through iTunes or MobileMe to do it. Apple makes a nice chunk of change on everything you do, but more importantly it gets to play gatekeeper. In OS X, Apple can’t block you from using apps it doesn’t like or competes with. But it famously blocks you from doing so on the iPhone and now presumably on the iPad, which is connected to the same App Store. How long before it blocks movies, TV shows, songs, books and even web sites? Scoff now, but don’t be so naïve as to believe that this isn’t possible. – The iPad’s Closed System: Sometimes I Hate Being Right

Now, this is not a new thing. Apple has never been very open minded about collaboration and experimentation. And, to be fair, thus far I believe that the decisions they have made have been very positive for the vast majority of their users. However, it is certainly a red flag for those of us who believe in data freedom.

New behaviors

This is where I think the iPad really has legs. Its price point and form factor has the opportunity to greatly the expand the number of people who expect to have the internet constantly at their fingertips, even when they’re on their couch. Most of the tech writers and Twitterers (myself included) are already used to this behavior, so it doesn’t seem new to them. However, I believe that it is a revolutionary idea that could vastly change how the average person understands computing and data access, which I think is a great thing.

I think of my in-laws as the typical “non-computer” user. They have desktops (obsolete, underpowered Dells), which they use for internet access, but, like most Americans, they aren’t really immersed in technology. But a device that contains all their books and plays streaming TV too? That’s something they might go for.

A lot of people are complaining that they don’t really need an iPad – they are happy with their laptop and their phone, and don’t really see the gap there. To be honest, I’m not sure the gap is there either. I think that there is a class of people for whom the iPad will actually replace the laptop. No, you can’t code on it. But how many people really want to?

Going back to my family for an example, last year my brother-in-law was looking into buying a laptop. He desperately wanted a Macbook – he loved the form factor and user experience. But, since he doesn’t use the computer for much beyond web browsing, he couldn’t justify the cost. Even if he could have justified it, it would still have been unaffordable. An iPad would have solved all his needs at a price point that works.

Summary

So, my answer for “is the iPad good for tech”, is a net “yes”. Is it as revolutionary as, say, the iPhone? Maybe not. Does it have major drawbacks? Yes, definitely. But I believe that the opportunities for the ecosystems and behaviors make it an overall step forward.

2) Will the iPad be successful for Apple?

This second question is much easier to answer. Based on the possibilities posed by the ecosystem and a new category of consumer behavior, I believe that the iPad will be big.

Apple will make serious bank on the ecosystem they create. Once someone purchases the iPhone, they will be downloading DVDs and books by the handful. This is obviously why they were able to make the price point so low.

This is not to say that everything will be rosy right out of the gate. Success might take some time. Like every Apple release, the first generation will be flawed and won’t have huge sales. But in five years, I am sure this will be huge for the company.

Addendum: A note on Flash and Multitasking

One of the consistent complaints about the device (and the iPhone before it) is the lack of Flash. The fact that people even thought that Flash would be included is absurd.

Let me break it down. Apple will NEVER support Flash. Apple makes its money through its product’s ecosystems, as I discussed above. If Flash worked in Safari, people would program games that never have to go the App Store. People would even charge for them on their own sites. Apple would lose its revenue stream. I’m not saying this decision is morally right, but it makes complete business sense.

Also, if we’re fair for a second, Flash is kinda shit. 90% of the time it’s used unnecessarily. Adobe is even more of a closed system than Apple is. I, for one, am psyched that it is dying out. Don’t worry, we’re not going to lose functionality – HTML 5 is on the way. How will Apple handle that threat to its system? No idea.

Another complaint that has been quieter but more important is about multitasking. Unlike a computer, you won’t be able to have multiple apps open at one time on the iPhone. This is a problem. When I’m reading a web site, I want my Twitter running, IM alerting me to friends’ messages, and Pandora playing. I suspect (and hope) that this might be addressed in a future release of the iPhone OS.

Having spent most of this week in bed, I feel spectacularly unqualified to write my usual “week in review” post. Instead, I’m going to answer a question I get a lot: how do I keep up with what’s going on in the digital world?

The simple answer is: I spend time in it. But to keep up with news, I’ve gotten into a routine that I follow pretty much daily, aside from when I’m sick/ in the last stages of a pitch/ out of town. It might sound like a lot, but I generally spend an hour each morning completing all the steps listed below.

Of course, this is just what works for me – lots of other folks have routines they prefer, and you can tweak this to your satisfaction. Here it goes:

1. Check Twitter

I check my Twitter feed first because, being real-time, it is generally the source for the most up-to-date news. At this point it’s worth while to spend a few minutes discussing who I follow on Twitter.

Scanning and re-tweeting

I primarily use TweetDeck to browse Twitter, and as a default I believe it opens up your friends’ 100 most recent tweets. For me this is a good amount to scan through every morning. The word “scan” is important – I definitely do not read every tweet. I flip through looking for words that jump out for me, paying particular attention to my favorite tweeters (sorry, I know how obnoxious that phrase is, but it’s descriptive). If I see something that is well-written and immediately interesting to me, I re-tweet it (I prefer the old-style of retweets: using “RT” or “via” syntax, rather than Twitter’s new built-in retweet feature, but that’s just me. If you have no idea what I’m talking about, read this).

Friends and followers

It’s really important to get your Twitter list to a point that is useful and relevant for you. I use WeFollow and Twitter lists to find new and interesting people (you can see what Twitter lists I’m following here). I also follow people I see my friends/ favorite tweeters talking to (or sending out Follow Friday recommendations for). Finally, I have a column set up in TweetDeck that shows new followers, and if they don’t appear to be total jackasses/ spam/ porn stars, I follow them back. Also, I’m not shy about unfollowing people if I don’t find their tweets useful.

A note about Twitter

A lot of people ask me what Twitter’s good for. The simple answer is that it’s not right for everyone. For me, it’s become similar to how I use RSS (see below), because the topics I’m interested in (digital, social media, technology) are heavily discussed on Twitter. If your interests are, say, medieval history and Danish shoe cobbling, you might have less luck (although you never know, times are changing). I also think that it’s increasingly important for people who work in digital media to have a respectable Twitter presence. I’m not talking a million followers, but you have to participate. If you don’t, it says something about how much you really know about your profession. Reading articles about Twitter is not the same as participating, because it’s constantly changing.

2. Read your “required” RSS feeds

Google Reader is my favorite place on the internet. It’s the single biggest source of information, entertainment, inspiration, and procrastination that I know.

What is Google Reader?

Feel free to skip this section and the next if you’re already a fan, or if you have an alternate RSS solution that works for you. Google Reader is an RSS aggregator. Learn about RSS here, and RSS aggregators here.

If you have a Google account, which you probably do, you have Google Reader – click this link to view yours.

Setting up your feeds

Just like Twitter is only as valuable as the people you follow, Google Reader is only as valuable as the sites you subscribe to. Personally, I subscribe to hundreds of sites. However, as with Twitter, I don’t read them all. I have set up a list of sites that I call “required” – meaning that I try my best to read all their posts every day. Together they generate about a thousand posts per day (see the next section for details on how I manage these posts).

Like Twitter, it will take time to get your list of “required” sites to a happy place. If your interests overlap with mine, you can start by subscribing to my required sites. Also, you can subscribe to my list of “Shared” items (for more about sharing, see the next section).

Scanning and processing your feeds

Even within my “required” feed, I don’t read every post – the beauty of Google Reader is its simple interface, which lets you quickly navigate from post to post by using the “J” key. I generally scan through the headlines and only read posts that strike my interest. If an article is interesting, I will do one of the following actions:

1. Share – If I think something will be interesting to share with my Twitter followers, I open the article in a new browser tab for processing in the next step (see below). I also generally mark the article as “Shared” in my Google Reader.
2. Read later – If it’s a long article and I don’t have time to read it at the moment, I use the Read it Later tool. This is a nifty application that integrates with Firefox as an extension, and adds an icon to each article in Google Reader. Adding a post to this tool causes it to be automatically downloaded to the companion iPhone app as well. I’m experimenting with Instapaper, a similar tool that also supports downloading to the Kindle.
3. Save for reference – If the post contains information that I think I will need to reference at a later time, I add the link to my Delicious bookmarks with relevant tags.

3. Share interesting links

Now we’re back to Twitter. I like to share interesting links that I find via my Google Reader on Twitter. I use a tool called HootSuite for actually publishing tweets (I use TweetDeck, mentioned above, mainly for reading tweets). In my opinion, HootSuite has two killer features.

1. It lets you schedule tweets for a later time – As I mentioned above, I complete this entire routine in an hour first thing every morning. However, I don’t want to send out 10 tweets within the span of 15 minutes for a few reasons. First of all, it’s annoying to see 10 tweets in a row from one person. Secondly, I like to space my tweets throughout the day so that different people see them at relevant times. If I sent out all my tweets in the morning, someone who checks their Twitter at lunchtime wouldn’t see any activity from me at all.
2. It tracks clicks to the links you share – Other services do this as well, but HootSuite has a nifty tracking mechanism. It shortens the URLs you share so that you can track how many people click on them. This is interesting because it helps you see how popular different content is with your followers. If someone retweets you, but keeps the HootSuite URL, you can count those numbers as well.

So, for each of my open tabs, I set up a tweet, scheduled at approximately half hour intervals throughout the day.

Summary

Shew. That’s a lot of text to describe something that doesn’t actually take a lot of time. However, be reassured – most of the work is in the setup, not the daily reading.

At this point I should probably say that, although I spend about an hour doing the bulk of my work reading and sharing, I do check Twitter and HootSuite periodically throughout the day to see how people have responded to my tweets. I’ll also reply to anyone who’s asked a question about something I shared. I also might check Google Reader if I have time over lunch.

That’s it! I hope this was helpful.

Google vs. China

Google was slammed by the US press when they agreed to censor content based on the laws of the Chinese government (background info here). Many commentators saw this as a direct violation of Google’s “don’t be evil” motto.

Why does the Chinese government’s policy towards censorship qualify as evil? Check out the content they consider objectionable. It’s insane and also a bit funny – I understand why they blog searches for “TiananmenSquare” (evil though it is), but YTMND? Really?

This week Google abruptly reversed their policy, after Gmail was hacked. The implication (although Google has not yet said so explicitly) is that the Chinese government was behind the hacking (the US government is planning to investigate). Google has temporarily closed its operations in China and given all its employees holiday leave.

“These attacks and the surveillance they have uncovered–combined with the attempts over the past year to further limit free speech on the web–have led us to conclude that we should review the feasibility of our business operations in China. We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all. We recognize that this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn, and potentially our offices in China.” – Google Blog

China’s response to Google is basically: if you don’t abide by our laws, leave. This is still playing out, and it could have interesting implications for how global technology will affect individual freedoms.

Conan vs. Leno

Another smackdown that’s happening online is the controversy between Conan O’Brien and NBC over the shifting of his time slot to accommodate Jay Leno. What’s interesting about this is how Conan (definitely the underdog in this situation) has played his hand entirely transparently and online. First, he released an intelligent, respectful letter explaining why he couldn’t agree with NBC’s decision. This letter was widely reported on online and garnered Conan a ton of support, including a popular “I’M WITH COCO” movement launched on Facebook. Next, Conan began using the situation as fodder for his show, with digital tie-ins: a joke that he had listed his show on Craigslist turned out to be real.

So far,  NBC has appeared to be entirely dumb and blind to these rumblings, which suggests either enormous incompetency or that Jeff Zucker’s campaign against Conan might be personal.

From a digital media perspective, it will be interesting to see if the groundswell online has any long-term implications for NBC.

How is the internet changing the way you think?

Great post from The Atlantic.

2010 Trends in Digital Marketing

When I last wrote, I mentioned that I was working on a deck that describes what trends I think will be critical in online advertising/ marketing for 2010. I haven’t forgotten about it, but in typical fashion, I’ve made it a bigger project than I initially anticipated. It really will be coming out soon, probably next week.

One of my favorite blogs these days is Autocomplete Me, an often hilarious site that catalogues funny and bizarre Google suggest queries.

Some of the suggestions that pop up are really baffling. For example, why are people asking “what do you feed a yeti anyway“? Why would someone search for “my nipples smell like sauerkraut“?

As Clive Thompson notes, many of these search queries are actually obscure cultural references. They might be a line from a movie or song, or an internet meme.

However, what’s interesting to me is what the stream-of-consciousness nature of these queries suggests about how we have begun to understand and use Google (and by extension, the internet). I find it fascinating that the internet is the first point of contact for so many people for any question or observation, and that we have become completely comfortable just typing things in (and anything goes) to see what sticks. It will be interesting to see how this tendency progresses as our technology gets even more sophisticated.