Crystal ball was not needed to predict Google Wave would fail

Forgive a momentary “I told you so” outburst because back in October 2009 as the tech world was dazzled by the Google Wave launch, I somewhat singularly wondered publically about whether it would succeed in a piece in Ad Age entitled:  “Google Wave should beware of the Communications and Collaboration Pitch”

It was an unpopular position to take at the time; after all, Google “Anything” was considered magic.  And after less than a year, being right like this is no fun actually because behind the failure are real people who invested a lot of heart and soul. It is a bitter pill to swallow.

History is a great teacher and in the Ad Age piece, I provide a history lesson on how “communication and collaboration” failed commercially utterly in the 1990s:

“Looking back at it now, I realize what we failed to do last time around is to symbiotically couple this whiz-bang technology with fulfilling a fundamental dimension of our humanity. Technology by itself is sterile and a communication and collaboration play was pretty sterile sounding.”

I also generously give them the secret of how to get it right given what we learned in our previous failed attempts to market unified collaboration platforms:

“This time round, though, Google Wave really has a chance to get it right if it forges a tight symbiotic link between this technology and a core element of our humanity.”

Finally, I gave them what I believed to be the secret to success with Google Wave. Clearly they ignored my sage advice (even if I do say so myself):

“It all comes down to understanding that Google Wave should be about the creation and management of our trusted communities. And if it can take those bonds and marry them with real-time, unified communications, the product has the makings of a technology milestone. But without the human dimension of community, “communications and collaboration” are just technologies. And technologies alone will not “connect” with Judy Consumer. At least it never has before.”

Never to put too subtle a point on it, I expanded my arguments and provided even more detail in a post here entitled; “What might Twitter and Facebook teach Google Wave about market success.” I fully explain why Google Wave has the potential to be a paradigm shift:

“Now I think Google Wave has the potential to be a technological milestone because it merges unified collaboration and communications (not new) within the fertile soil of a trusted community (this is new). “Pull” models coming online now enable this combination of dynamics to “gel” into a platform that can be vibrant and paradigm shifting. …”

I ended this piece in October 2009 hopeful; “I suspect that if anyone will know how to use this treasure it will be Google. I am rooting for them.”

So much for a happy ending :( .

Judy Shapiro

Does technology makes our lives easier?

Nope and here’s 10 ways technology actually makes our lives harder.

A while back, I wrote in Ad Age an article entitled; A Digital Myth: Technology Doesn’t Make Life Easier , http://adage.com/digitalnext/post?article_id=136533 where I explain that while technology makes tasks easier – it really does not make our lives easier. As an example, I compared the task of washing clothes in a machine versus a rock. Sure – a machine is far easier than a rock in the actual washing of the clothes. But if you add up all the other things that you need to do to make the machine work (the water infrastructure, the cost of repair, buying laundry detergent), we see that doing laundry via the trusty, highly reliable rock was far less complicated.

Since I wrote that article, I notice that the technology wars race are going as fiercely as ever, with techno-titans Google, Microsoft and Apple waging their epic battles for the heart and mind of Judy Consumer.

So, for a quiet moment, I wanted to share the 10 ways that technology most decidedly does not make our lives easier. I present this list, friends, knowing full well that I will be subjected to the inevitable backlashing  from tech fanboys. I have run afoul of them before – so gentlemen (I am being generous) – I’m ready — bring it on.

1) Harder to remember the everyday stuff of life.

This is a pet peeve which continues to drive me nuts because people don’t even try to remember the little mundane things of life anymore. With auto dial, auto login and “history” functions that tell you where you’ve been, our minds have devolved so that we can not easily remember these things.

I recognize we have more passwords, logins etc to remember than just 5 years ago but still – our ability for retaining simple little things seems gone. In the past, I made it point to know the phone number of my kid’s pediatrician and my immediate family. Now I don’t even know the cell phone number of my kids.

“Ok – what’s so bad about that?” you may ask. “Why waste those little grey cells on mundane memory tasks that our devices can do better and more conveniently?”  Good question – UNTIL you lose your phone or you have to change PCs – then you are in communications hell until you sort it all out.  My remedy is to force myself to recall key numbers.  As to the rest – oh well.

(Historical sidebar. Before the innovation of printing, our brains were capable of far greater acts of retaining information, as demonstrated by ancient Greek orators capacity to recite thousands of lines of poetry. Books, over time changed our biology so that our capacity to remember large quantity of information was diminished. So while I bemoan the loss of memory – I know it has happened before.)

2) Harder to keep your communications world “synced”.

I am going through this right now. I am working at a new company that is virtual. I now have 3 email accounts which are so cross forwarded to each other — it is a webmailtangle. I will figure it out but not without more pain that I think I should have to endure. I do not want to have to understand what POP or STMP or incoming or outgoing server configurations are.

And that just covers email! Now add the additional layers of IM, mobile, Google Voice, Blackberries, and all the identities we use to communicate in our social networks and you have communication complexity comparable to what a mid-sized company might have had 20 years ago.

It’s great that we are reachable 24/7 – but no one can seriously contend that all this connectivity makes our lives easier. In fact, it has become so complex, that new technologies are built to manage all these communications touchpoints.

Well that just about left “easy” in the dust.

3) Harder to dive deeply on any subject

A CEO I knew was very diligent about buying any book on marketing he thought would be useful. He himself never read any of them. Rather he had his people “summarize the book into key points”. I am sure if he read any of them, he may have gathered some insight that was lost on his people – but I understand the appeal of getting fed small info bits that are easy to snack on. So we take shortcuts. We scan text, we read extracts, we use twitter because 140 characters does not take long to absorb.

In fact, the attraction to digi-bytes has spawned new strategies in how to write as little as possible and still get the “a” message across. I am all for a Zen approach to content – simple and lean but it seems that content has become anorexic.

Business books tend to be written with very short telegraphic chapters with pithy titles like “The top 7 ways to [fill in the blank]…Try getting anyone to read an article that is more than a few paragraphs (and thanks to any of you who got this far on this decidedly non quick article).

Worse, far worse, I find myself getting impatient with writers who might, heavens, might take a few paragraphs to get to the point (the irony of this is not lost on me). The glorious joy of reading something with depth and substance seems to be on the endangered list.

4) Harder to be efficient

I think no one can deny that technology allows us do more things, usually at the same time. Talk, IM, tweet, web browse – all while driving (OK kidding- sorta).

My point is that new studies reveal that multitasking ain’t all it was cracked up to be.  Here’s an article from Wired that makes the point well; http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/08/multitasking/ (I write this as I have music blaring in my ear and I am IMing with two different colleagues. I notice how my typing deteriorates in direct relation to how many tasks I am trying to do at the same. It is not a pretty picture.)

5) Harder to get face time

Any parent out there knows what I am talking about here. Even Whoopi Goldberg observed (in a TV special) that while our children are smarter than we are, we are raising a generation of “barbarians”; children who are proficient tweeters, and IM’ers but who have too little interaction with real people in the real world. They seem almost out of place in the real world.  I am convinced that in 20 years, the lack of face time will have repercussions as these techno-savvy but socially naive children start having children of their own. Technology will take center stage in the training of their children. That can’t be good.

But it doesn’t stop there. In the business world, lack of face time has real costs today. Leaders spend less and less face time with their people often using cryptically crafted emails tapped out on a Blackberry’s to give complex instructions. That leaves a lot to the imagination – again – not always a good thing.

6) Harder to learn appreciation

I remember a few years ago I bought a traveling DVD/ TV player for the car (my kids were at the irritable age when car trips were tedious). Anyway, this device had wireless earphones, wireless controls with a luxurious 12” screen and detachable speakers. I was loving it. So much technology in such a compact, tidy device.

My kids were rather underwhelmed. For them, it was a convenience not in any way deserving of the reverence that I seemed to bestow on the thing. It takes A LOT to impress my teenage kids. It takes a lot to impress any teenager nowadays. What happens when they hit 30?  I guess to get a gee-whiz out of them might require a trip to the moon. And even then I wonder….

7) Harder to be loyal

Today, loyalty seems to be a quaint, sentimental notion that seems old fashioned. There is scant loyalty to be seen in relationship, jobs, brands, technology, geography.

We are comfortable meeting our “soul mate” online and with the powers of technology there are probably a few candidates who qualify. We are easily seduced to change brands with the scantest of promises. We don’t even remain loyalty to people within our newly created social networks bouncing from one network to another as easily as one changes a password.

Loyalty is out of fashion because maybe it is not really expected anymore; so much is so replaceable so easily. I miss loyalty in others and I make it point to practice it as actively as I can. In fact, people are often surprised at the loyalty I show to previous employers. From their perspective, it is so unexpected and unnecessary. I show loyalty as a way to express my gratitude to employers who enriched my career. It seems very necessary to me.

8 ) Harder to stay current and actually find the information you need

If anyone asks me why Twitter took off, I’d say it is because it gives people who want to stay current a convenient way to do so. That about sums it up for me.

Yet despite all the digi-byte ways we can get information, staying up to date seems to be getting harder. First to explore any subject online, you have to wade through digital stacks of garbage data. You have make decisions about what to information to trust or not. It sometimes feels like looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack.

Then, once you have to figured out what information is worth keeping, you have to spend a heck of a lot of time connecting the dots because as we said in point 3, no one writes meaty articles much anymore. It feels more like a scavenger hunt where one gathers little info bits and then from these obtuse clues we hope it adds up to something substantial.

Staying current was something that always required a certain dedication and investment of time. It seems now though the sheer deluge of data (good and bad) makes this so much harder on everyone.

9) Harder to gain perspective

Context makes all the difference when you are trying to understand the truth of a topic or controversy. That is becoming more and more of a challenge because of the difficulty of vetting trustworthy information. It is harder to know which person has the credentials to back up information they disperse.

Yep, gaining perspective through online information can be like making your way through a maze – fraught with dead ends and frustrating misdirection. Someone should come up with a GPS system for data navigation. I would buy that in a heartbeat.

10) Harder to establish trust – the online kind

This should come as no surprise to anyone. In the beginning, before social media became such a dominant marketing tool, customer reviews had power to influence, people you knew were trying to friend you and online connectivity was a joy because it could help you stay connected on a global scale.

But with the commercialization of social media, one consequence has been that trust has plummeted. A recent Ad Age article ; In Age of Friending, Consumers Trust Their Friends Less, explains that; “Only 25% of People Find Peers Credible, Flying in Face of Social-Media Wisdom” according to an Edelman study http://adage.com/article?article_id=141972. Simply, trust diminishes in direct proportion to the growth of social networks because it is hard to authenticate the identity of people online. This trust gap makes many online interactions harder to conduct.

To sum up, lest I leave you with the wrong impression — the upside of all this technology is amazing – in every respect. But it comes at a price that is perhaps more dear than first realized. So I advocate a new techno consciousness that doesn’t fall for the promise that “technology makes our lives easier”.

At least not on my watch.

Judy Shapiro

Social Media’s the Little Engine That Can Build Awareness

Here Are Six Reasons Why It Will in 2010

By Judy Shapiro

Published in Advertising Age;  December 16, 2009

http://adage.com/digitalnext/post?article_id=141109

Remember the children’s story “The Little Engine That Could”? It told of how the big shiny engines were not up to the task of getting up over the hill to deliver the toys to the kids in time for the holidays. Instead, despite the skeptics, it was the little engine in an act of pure will, that kept telling itself, “I think I can, I think I can,” who was able to get over the big hill to get the job done.

In some ways, social media is like that little engine (and I use the term social media in its broadest sense to encompass digital and social media). Everyone is playing with social media, but there is a deeply held perception that social media lacks mass audience reach, measurability and depth to get the job done. This perception fuels the debate of whether digital agencies are “ready to lead,” which as been a hot topic even within this very forum. Some digital agencies contend that social media is mature enough to be the leading vehicle whereas big agencies stay true to the law of large numbers that traditional media reliably delivers.

But the debate about who should lead seems rather irrelevant, because the key concern should be what will work to get over that “awareness hill” that every advertiser must scale to achieve business results. Is the little social media engine ready to scale the big hill?

“I think it can” and here’s why.

When social media exploded on the scene (and I think that’s a fair characterization), it garnered attention because it held the promise of microtargeting in combination with a new level of engagement that one-way traditional advertising could never duplicate. No one doubted the value of reaching people in these highly engaged environments, but no one really knew how to do it efficiently en masse. Large agencies operated within the traditional ad model that delivered numbers while digital agencies tended to rely on the “viral” nature of their tactics to deliver large numbers. That approach was too hit-and-miss to satisfy most businesses and rightfully so.

This is why, until now, social media has not captured a larger share of big advertisers’ budgets — it seems oxymoronic that social media’s microtargeting capability can ever deliver mass audiences.

But like our little engine, I believe 2010 will be the year where the social media finally says “I think I can” to deliver large audiences because the technology pieces are coming together to create the formula for audience reach, measurability and interactivity that yield intent and business results. There is a new maturity in this space as represented, for example, by marketers who now understand that thousands of Twitter followers has no direct relevance to effectiveness or that Facebook alone can not launch campaigns.

Here’s how the social media engine can be used to deliver mass audiences efficiently:

  • Think about creating “content campaigns” to drive a focused message using a multichannel approach, e.g video, mobile marketing, social networks and even traditional media. This approach puts the value on content as an audience builder but in a very strategic way. And to help content campaigns along, there are innovative new technology companies, like WebCollage, that offer content syndication and management services to make this task very efficient on a large scale.
  • Tap into the power of your customer service organization to be your social-media front-line soldiers. It is one of the most powerful ways to achieve mass reach within current organizational resources. JetBlue is a great example here as they make it a point to respond to every tweet within minutes.
  • Create mobile apps to propel new interactions while allowing you to bake in the viral looping element. Gap Style Mixer is a great example; the app gets you in-store discounts while letting you share the discounts with friends.
  • Use behaviorally appropriate ad networks as the “carpet layer” of a social-media campaign to deliver large number of impressions similar to the old fashioned GRP (gross rating points) of TV. But to ensure that impressions deliver interactivity, weave in a diversity of behavioral targeting opportunities and retargeting programs from companies like FetchBack or SearchIgnite (this is where you re-present ad an to a target who did not respond the first time).
  • Adapt real-world social networks to extend the reach of your social media campaigns. One innovative company in this space is called HouseParty, which allows people to host real world parties for product sampling (think Tupperware parties or Avon Ladies). This company cleverly utilizes social media so they can deliver large scale numbers quickly and efficiently.
  • Introduce new tools to measure social media that focus on engagement, interactivity and intent. One great example is a company called Nuconomy, which provides new tools to understand how interactivity drives intent and sales.

As in our story, when the little engine scaled over the hill, it gleefully said “I thought I could, I thought I could.” Perhaps 2010 will be the year when the social media is able to say the same.

Judy Shapiro

Twitter’s growing pains in 2010.

I have been tracking Twitter much like a bird lover would affectionately monitor a prize species through their every migratory move in an effort to gain that prized sighting. So when I notice a flutter of Twitter buzz that Twitter is profitable – it perked me right up.

My first instinct when I read the tweets was to say; “Well done”.  But when one reads a bit more, one is struck by the realization that their new profitability engine was because of some cash deals rather than a sustainable monetization engine where, gasp, Twitter  actually sells a service to a “Judy Consumer”.

No such business maturity seems to hover anywhere near the Twitter nest. This is probably why Twitter has some serious skeptics, myself among them sometimes. “When will they grow up” I ask myself, “and create a real business with real services.”

But I see no such plans yet, nor, do any of the business analysts who should know. Sure, I see how Twitter caters to a few industries brilliantly – the media world and the PR world for instance. But I don’t see any deepening of “Judy Consumer’s” attachment to Twitter.

Instead, we hear loud twittering about how business can use Twitter to great effect or endless schemes where businesses can use Twitter to promote themselves. And all this business exploitation of Twitter carries the real risk that it will alienate its fragile consumer base which BTW has so many ghost users that its hard to get a real tally of who lives  in Twit-o-ville.

Yet, I can easily imagine some consumer friendly services with just a bit of mature business thinking. For instance, I love Twitter because it has become a highly accurate, human filtered way to sift through the info saturated digital world. The list of people I follow on Twitter is a mere 24 (I have a paltry 185 group of hardy followers) and is highly structured into three rough tiers: about 1/3 are made of up huge news publishers so I hear about the big news items (e.g. CNN), then another 1/3 is made up of a group of “specialty” reporters and pundits covering categories that are important to me (e.g. Guy Kawaski). The final 1/3 are folks who amuse me or are likely to find that quirky item on the web that I would never ever find on my own.  Surely, other people use Twitter the way I do and I bet there’s a paid service in there somewhere.

Maybe I am too hard on Twitter. Maybe they are thinking along these lines anyway. Or maybe Twitter wants to continue its Peter Pan life within the cocoon of the techno-rati.

Maybe.

But here’s a thought for you Twitter folks to help you on your journey of maturation. When you wake up tomorrow pretend that you have no idea about how you are going to make payroll in the next four weeks. Or for a change, forget that you have oodles of someone else’s cash in the bank and try to figure out how to convince your first 1,000 prospects to buy from you. You’d be amazed at quickly you grow up in the process.

Take a chance and join us in the grown up world – we’re ready to welcome you with open arms.

Judy Shapiro

My top 10 New Year’s “un-resolutions” for 2010

We all know about our New Year’s resolutions. We make them with all good intentions to keep them. But we also know that what usually happens is that, inevitably, one by one our resolutions go by the way side. So I stopped making those New Year’s resolutions years ago because it seems to be a recipe for failure.

Instead, this year for a change, I have started to make “un-resolutions” – things I am determined NOT to do. Here’s my top 10 un-resolutions. Take care – this may become a new tradition.

1) I will not get seduced by any new digital marketing toy just because some industry pundit thinks it’s the coolest thing to hit the street. Nor will I believe every promise made by every new marketing technology company.

2) I will not abandon common sense in digital marketing and be blinded by digital agencies promises that their “new” campaigns will go viral and get the attention of millions of people. I will continue to listen to my gut and if it sounds to good to be true, I will let skepticism drive my decision.

3) I will not abandon newspaper, magazines, radio and other forms of traditional media if it is the right vehicle. No matter how sexy digital media may seem because of the perceived lower cost, I will continue to create integrated programs that weave together the best of both the traditional and digital worlds.

4) I will not give up my attachment to email marketing. Sorry folks – but email marketing, well done, drives real business results. If your email campaign did not work – either you had a bad list or an inadequate call-to-action or maybe your agency did not know what they were doing.

5)  I will not be fooled into thinking that the ad market is going to rebound in 2010. Nope. The ad market will continue to be buffeted by the tides of an evolving economic landscape and by consumers’ ever fickle attraction to new tech toys like mobile devices.  These trends will continue to dampen ad revenue for publishers for some time to come.

6) I will not get excited about cloud computing – at least not yet. I do see how it is going to dominate in the next 5 years – but there are real security problems to solve before everyone can get into the clouds. Conversely, I do get excited by all types of ASP offers as that is a steady business model that offers real value to consumers.

7) I will not blindly follow Google as they chow down every tech industry from telecom to digital publishing. Ever one loves to love Google. Me too. But that does not mean that I have to support every initiative as Google relentlessly marches toward digital dominance. In the process, they stifle competition and kill real innovation by companies who deserve to succeed. Now here’s my one New Year’s prediction (for 2012) – I predict that Google will have to break themselves up to avoid the growing recognition that Google is really a monopoly, albeit a new kind.

8 ) I will not diminish my slavish devotion to data driven marketing no matter what new platforms come out that can behaviorally target any audience any way I wish. I know I know – the BT folks can slice and dice an audience so many ways that it makes a marketer salivate. But unless I can see, touch and feel the data – I will pass for now.

9)  I will not start following every Tom, Dick and Jane to gain more Twitter followers. OK, so I only have about 175 folks following me but at least I know they read what I tweet. Quality – not quantity is what drives social media.

10) And my final un-resolution. I will not try appear to be “30 something” just because I love digital marketing. I know that the average age of people in digital marketing tends to be 27 – but my depth in this space has yielded real world, hard won recognition. And while I am at it, will not submit to peer pressure to use more “hair product” than one can find in a Duane Reade store so I can appear suitably young as a digital marketer. What you see (grey hair and all) is what you get :)

There you have it. My top 10 un-resolutions for 2010. If you have your list – feel free to share it here.

Judy Shapiro

What might Twitter and Facebook teach Google Wave about market success?

It’s not what you think but you’ll have to “pull” the answer out of me.

Recently, I have become fascinated with the new academic work around the paradigm shift to the “pull” form of corporate management from the more established “push” business models. This notion, which has been kicking around for a few years as far as I know, has recently become quite popular, probably helped along by recent work on the subject. One excellent white paper entitled; “From Push to Pull; emerging models for mobilizing resources” from Deloitte, authored by Hagel and Brown provides a solid conceptual basis for the clear differences in these two principles.

Here’s a brief excerpt (but I encourage a read of the whole 23 pages):

The signs are around us. We are on the cusp of a shift to a new … model that will re-shape many facets of our life, including how we identify ourselves, participate with others, connect with others, mobilize resources and learn.

Over the past century, we have been perfecting highly efficient approaches to mobilizing resources. These approaches … share a common foundation. They are all designed to “push” resources in advance to areas of highest anticipated need.

This new approach, {however} focuses on “pull” – creating platforms that help people to mobilize appropriate resources when the need arises

The white paper goes onto to describe how when resources are tight, corporate “push” models dominate because they can control and optimize precious resource consumption. But with abundant resources, comes a different model – a “pull” model where users drive the rate of consumption of resources. I’ll also point your attention to the fact that this model is grounded in our very human need for “connectivity” as I will return to this theme shortly.

Now this is heady stuff because a pull model is nothing less than a 180 degree turn on how we think about the way to run businesses today. But what’s that to do with Twitter, Facebook and Google Wave? And what in heaven’s name has that got to do with corporate management theory?

Ah – not so fast – I said you would have to pull it out of me. In fact, I may stretch your patience even further by suggesting we go on a treasure hunt and the treasure we seek is nothing less than understanding why certain technologies succeed while others fail.

Our treasure hunt begins as most do with orienting ourselves on our treasure map. In this case, our orientation lies in having a compass to help us understand that technology breakthroughs rarely happen to the company with the best idea or the smartest technology or even the most deserving goals. Nope. Most often it happens in one definable moment – when the technologically breakthrough is symbiotically coupled to fulfilling a fundamental dimension of our humanity. Technology by itself is sterile.

Ok, now that we have our bearings, let’s follow our map to uncover our buried treasure.

If we follow the Internet’s evolution in the past 10 years, no one doubts that the Internet has become a highly dependent technology for people and business world over. It enables powerful communications and connectivity capabilities, but in its current iteration, the Internet lacks the basic building blocks for meaningful connectivity — like the technological ability to establish trust. (Tangentially, the issues of trust on the Internet are complex and well articulated by  Kieron O’Hara and Wendy Hall in their September 2008 paper;  “Trust on the Web: Some Web Science Research Challenges”; (http://www.uoc.edu/uocpapers/7/dt/eng/ohara_hall.pdf.)

So users started to “pull” trust into their Internet experiences partly through the creation of trusted communities like forums, blogs, review sites and the like. That trusted community concept was quickly embraced by the public so that now almost all of us engage in some digital social community or other (see Pew Institute research on the subject). The initial pull, to create trust in online interactions, spawned the great social networking revolution we are experiencing right now. I bet some future historian will pinpoint this moment as perhaps the tipping point moment propelling other “pull” corporate models.

Returning to our treasure hunt, though, let’s see where our map has led us so far. The Internet grew so fast because it expanded personal connectivity, which then created the need for trust within this new level of connectedness which then resulted in all forms (and variations) of “trusted” communities that were only possible because the new “pull” tech platforms let people utilize technology when they need it.

Still with me?

Ok – good and now your patience will be rewarded because here is where “X” marks the spot. The treasure we have been seeking is revealed in appreciating  that when technology truly serves humanity by fulfilling some basic human need or desire (like wanting to connect), it can become a powerful force that can move fast within the ecosystem, helped along by the emerging “pull” mechanism discussed above.

This is what Twitter and Facebook can teach Google Wave. They understood how to use “technology” to satisfy our very human need to be connected within a “trusted” community. In the case of Twitter, they innovated so anyone can have a “feed” to “their” network (a.k.a. community) and in the case of Facebook, they created a way for people to create their own trusted community. In both cases, (and many others too), we see that when technology is intrinsically woven in with satisfying a fundamental human need, like the deep need to be part of a trusted community,  with an effective dispersion model like our “pull” model, you have the ingredients for success.

Now I think Google Wave has the potential to be a technological milestone because it merges unified collaboration and communications (not new) within the fertile soil of a trusted community (this is new). “Pull” models coming online now enable this combination of dynamics to “gel” into a platform that can be vibrant and paradigm shifting. From anyone I talked to who has actually used the product, (I have not received an invitation yet, but I am a patient woman) there is an expectant hope for it – much like the expectation one might have at a party hyped to be cool but that just got started.

I hope Google Wave recognizes that people want to technology to power their trusted digital communities – and not so much their “communications and collaboration” (sounds pretty sterile doesn’t it?). I can see how this technology has the potential to truly expand our comprehension of what a trusted community can become.

The power of these converging trends – Internet, “pull’ models, trust and community – is the treasure any tech business can capture for themselves. I suspect that if anyone will know how to use this treasure it will be Google. I am rooting for them.

Judy Shapiro

http://twitter.com/judyshapiro

Contemplative Silence

September is a time that evokes contemplation.

It is a time of new beginnings; kids start school, college or their first jobs. September is the beginning of the critical 4th qtr business cycle. And in September the Jewish New Year process (all 8 weeks of it starting with Rosh Hashanah to Yom Kippor 10 days later to the final capstone of the New Year’s process with the 8-day holiday Sukkoth) occupies a fair amount of one’s waking time.

All this change and transition drives contemplation. Hence my silence for the last few weeks. But with contemplation comes inspiration and new potential to drive progress.

So what have I been thinking about?

I have been thinking about connections and how people connect in today’s super-hyped connected, digitized, info  Judy Consumersaturated world. I have been thinking about how Judy Consumer within a mere few years has had to absorb an astonishing amount “new” connection possibilities … from friends finding her (many of whom she would have rather not found her), to strangers claiming to be her friends to insta-info with Twitter and so on.

How does she think about all this connectivity? Who does she trust to start a connection with? Which connections are helpful or dangerous? When should Judy Consumer be visible to the open, social world and when should she guard her privacy?

It seems that communications innovation engine is coming at Judy Consumer at an accelerated rate – kinda like a mini version of Kurzweil’s “knee of the curve” principle outlined in the book, The Singularity is Near. In communications technology, we ain’t seen nothing yet. The new, mobile applications or the new expanding lifecasting capability from the social networking folks open a whole new horizon of connection capability for Judy Consumer.

New beginnings – you bet. But “fasten your seat belts – it’s going to be a bumpy ride”…

Judy Shapiro

www.twitter.com/judyshapiro

Keep your chin up Twitter!

 I feel a bit protective nowadays of Twitter, almost like the elder aunt who sees her younger relatives struggle with issues she figured out decades ago.

Why do I feel protective of them now? Because I see Twitter being hosed on so many fronts all at the same time. From technological challenges of a meteoritic rise to the scrutiny they must submit to as the poster child of some brighter tech/ financial future.  They get bashed every time there is a security problem – like the recent hack or their user imposter issues. And the unpredictability of their business risk must seem like a steady, intense diet of fear and frustration. All this is blended in with adrenalin rush they no doubt should feel at being one of the cool techno kids on the block, even if there is a niggling uncertainly about what the real upside might be.  

 But the worst part of the Twitter Boom is how they are quickly becoming the symbol of some new age, techno-gold rush with all the negative associations. In the past week alone, I have seen a steady increase in the number SPAM in my in box claiming all sorts of schemes to make a lot money using/ leveraging/ engineering Twitter. Like “How to build a brand on Twitter”, “How to use Twitter to hire superstars”, “How to create a new biz with Twitter” and my favorite  “Earn millions from the Twitter explosion”  – really. 

 This must be awful for the Twitter people. Trying to shut down these make money scams to protect their good name would be like trying to win at that awful “whack a mole” game. It is a losing, exhausting and demoralizing proposition. There must be a level of edginess that hovers over them.

 So my dear younger Twitter colleagues take some advice from your “elder aunt”. Fame may be fleeting, but once your 15 minutes of fame have passed, I hope you emerge at the other end stronger, more stable and less vulnerable. Hard work, perseverance and a long term perspective does almost always prevail.  

 Live and learn.

 Your distant but compassionately concerned “aunt”.

Judy Shapiro

http://twitter.com/judyshapiro

How to achieve social media overload – in 6 hours or less.

I was unprepared TBH. All I did was post in AdAge http://adage.com/digitalnext/post?article_id=137752, what I thought was a fairly sedate article about how the aggressive growth goals of Google reminded me of AT&T. And I wondered out loud if Google wasn’t possibly headed for the same sad fate as AT&T.

Now I guess going after Google should be done with care. I thought I had. Clearly I was wrong.

Within first 60 minutes after the article posted in Ad Age a few random reactions. Nothing much.

But within the next 60 minutes (or 120 minutes after the article first appeared), the deluge started in earnest. Over the following few hours, I was called oblivious, clueless, utterly ignorant of Silicon Valley sensibilities and my favorite just plain “dumb”. Ok I say to myself, I guess I should expect it. In fun, I posted the following Twitter posts (http://twitter.com/judyshapiro):

By 10:00, I had gotten dozens of private contacts – not to mention a flood of comments on my blog. I had to edit many of them.11:58 PM Jul 7th 

Comments range- outrage from Google lovers, praise from Google haters and nostalgia from ex-AT&T folks.11:58 PM Jul 7th 

So for efficiency which is what Twitter is primed for my responses to all herewith …11:58 PM Jul 7th 

GOOGLE LOVERS: My admiration for Google knows no bounds. But arrogance or miscalculations because of arrogance has real cost in human terms.11:59 PM Jul 7th 

GOOGLE HATERS: I am NOT your new high priestess. I simply notice that when big companies fail it is often the little guy who pays the price.11:59 PM Jul 7th 

FOR EX-AT&T EMPLOYEES: My time there nourishes me to this day. I hope you were able to say the same for each of you.12:00 AM Jul 8th 

The cascade continued. Then, the article was picked up by Silicon Alley with a link back from Fortune and CNN. And the comments continued unabated.

 I try and take the comments with a sense of equanimity, but it does get hard. And the real lesson learned? When you take a controversial stance, it seems 6 hours is the amount of boil time needed for the social media pot to start to whistle. It may not be a statistically projectable test case, but this experience has been an eye opener. And BTW – the kettle keeps simmering for at least 4 days after the initial blowing of its top.

I may have to try this again just to test my hypothesis. Then again, maybe not. 

Judy Shapiro (http://twitter.com/judyshapiro)

Enough already! We’ve been here before.

I can’t believe the media frenzy around how, according to “everyone”, Twitter virtually single handed heralded a new era of citizen journalism. This little 140 character wonder is able to leap tall political buildings in a single bound …

From all the reporting you would think never before in the history of man has broadcasting ever had a more profound impact on the political landscape.

How ridiculous.

One only needs to look back over the years – these “media game changer” moments happened again and again. From the impact TV coverage of Vietnam war had on the American psyche to the availability of bandwidth for public access to the ability of anyone to broadcast via the internet – whether it be Twitter or any number of other video based chat rooms.

These all share one fundamental trait – they allow the one:many broadcast model. Technology just made this capability available to almost everyone … whether a news station or a civilian broadcasts a riot on his cell phone.

The opening up of a broadcast platform to so many more people is not without significant issues. It is not hard to fathom how, a particularly clever influencer, could recruit an army of citizen journalists to broadcast a particular version of a story. The lack of credentials and accountability is a startling development that should not be ignored.  

It’s one thing for anyone and everyone to become a mini broadcast network – the question then becomes which broadcaster can we trust.

Unfortunately, now you’re on your own, my friend.

Judy Shapiro

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,193 other followers