Bill tweeted:

To which Jay responded:

Jay Rosen brings up a great point. The Internet didn’t suddenly make niche channels popular, it suddenly made niche channels possible. That’s a huge difference. Before the web came around, consumers never had the choice: in order to get the content they wanted, they also had to pay for [thus finance] the content they didn’t care about. As Chris Anderson so ably pointed out in The Long Tail, the media economics of the time simply didn’t make anything else possible. That’s changed!

The web broke 20th century media economics, thus enabling the rise of what Jeff Jarvis called the “mass of niches”. On the web, it became economically feasible for anyone to create/embrace niche channels and content. In such an environment, consumers are no longer strapped to the stuff they don’t care about. Relevance becomes available to everyone, at no extra cost. Once anybody has experienced the pertinence and flexibility of the later, it becomes hard to see why anyone would be expected to settle for the former [with all its inefficiencies] as their primary source of content ever again.

]]> http://www.alexanderlynn.com/blog/the-fall-of-bundled-media/feed/ 0 http://www.alexanderlynn.com/blog/run/ http://www.alexanderlynn.com/blog/run/#comments Thu, 19 Jan 2012 03:46:02 +0000 alex http://www.alexanderlynn.com/blog/?p=677 While browsing the web yesterday, I came across this great campaign idea (which seems to be the brainchild of Sapient Nitro’s Annie Chiu). It’s simple, memorable and prompts people to partake precisely in the type of behavior which drives the Nike brand (all for less than the cost of a billboard). Exactly the kind of witty stuff I’d like to see coming out of agencies more often. Kudos!

While listening to Mark talk about his college years (and how at the time, he never thought he’d play such a critical role in enabling social connections on the web), Charlie Rose proposed that Facebook had become “a personalized web within a web”. Zuckerberg responded by saying:

“I think it’s shaping the broader web. If you look back for the past 5-7 years, the story of social networking has really been about getting these 800 million people connected, so that they can stay in touch with all these people who they care about, and get them signed up for facebook and all that. But, if you look forward for the next five years, I think that the story that people are going to remember 5 years from now, isn’t how this one site was built, it was how every single service that you use, is now going to be better with your friends.“ – Mark Zuckerberg

I felt like that line perfectly crystallized the situation. In the broader context of the web, Mark’s actions weren’t/aren’t solely valuable because he managed to create “this one site” that connected people. Rather, they were/are valuable because “this one site” ultimately forced the web to focus on its users. FB helped “shape the web” into a more user centric environment.  It (alongside other social services) is making the web less about the technology and more about the people.

Feel free to check out the hour long interview on the Charlie Rose website. Interesting stuff, as always.

“My former colleague Mark Lemley wrote this wonderful little piece about nanotechnology and mid way through the piece, he kind of remarked in passing that: if you think about all the fundamental technologies of the 20th century (computer hardware/software, biotech technologies) all of those fundamental technologies were either by accident or intentionally FREE [ Note: as in 'unconfined by IP' as opposed to 'of no monetary cost']. So, they tried to patent the computer; the patent office rejected it. Software was not considered protectable in any effective way for most of the 20th century. Watson & Crick certainly didn’t want DNA protected in any effective way through IP. So these fundamental technologies were FREE and ON TOP OF THESE FREE TECHNOLOGIES, people innovated, and they got intellectual property FOR THE INNOVATIONS ON TOP.” - Larry lessig

This is definitely something to think about as he later goes on to remark that this approach to innovation, appears to have dissipated/lost favor in the 21st century (thus possibly harming our ability to innovate in the long run, but more importantly, potentially impinging upon our future ability to reap benefits from inherently beneficial innovations.)

Good Stuff!

]]> http://www.alexanderlynn.com/blog/lessig-on-innovation/feed/ 0 http://www.alexanderlynn.com/blog/our-social-propensity/ http://www.alexanderlynn.com/blog/our-social-propensity/#comments Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:38:47 +0000 alex http://www.alexanderlynn.com/blog/?p=547 It’s easy to be impressed by the beauty and intriguing nature of the following image, but one truly needs to read the account of it’s creator to fully comprehend the complexity of what (s)he is currently staring at. On the surface, it looks like a gorgeous visualization of Facebook users around the globe. Nevertheless, this isn’t exactly the case. While reading Paul Butler’s account of how he went about creating this piece (while interning at FB), one quickly realizes that this is far more than just a picture or map of Facebook users. It’s a truly mesmerizing data visualization that roots itself in one thing and one thing only: our human propensity to continually expand our social circle! You know that saying “we are social animals” which first emerged in greek philosophy, but has been reiterated in multiple ways by countless people ever since? Well this is that…visualized. The image is rather captivating and ably reminds one of just how social we were, are and have become as a species. (Check out the high-res version of the image in Paul Butler’s post. Enjoy!)

Facebook Data Visualization by Paul Butler (intern on Facebook’s data infrastructure engineering team)

1- “Big problems don’t require big solutions. ” In fact “big behavioral change can occur through small actions”.

2- “In his book ‘Little Bets‘, Peter Sims talks about how great companies stumble upon  greatness. It comes from experimentation and learning from placing little bets rather than ponderously trying to birth perfection.”

3- Build long ideas. The long idea is a brilliant thought first articulated (I think) by Jon Williams of Grey.  It’s a better objective than the big idea. They’re created by a stream of small ideas. It creates participation and realizes that the launch of the campaign is, in reality, the beginning.”

4- ”It’s about making communication products, not communicating a product”

His series of posts can be found on his blog (http://garethkay.typepad.com) with the first one being: Think Small, dated May 13th. Enjoy; they’re well worth the read and in my mind do a pretty awesome job at challenging the notion that only big ideas can win big.

Did your last marketing solution take cultural momentum into account? In simpler terms, did you ponder the fact that the ecosystem in which consumers live (and in which your ‘solution’ will be delivered) may change significantly mere months down the line?

If you think about that the next time you are trying to ‘connect’ with consumers, you’ll probably end up doing things differently!

Such airy statements prove that most people really haven’t understood the essence of the viral video. So, let’s make this clear once and for all: your video isn’t viral just because it’s shaky, poorly lit and cheaply produced. In fact, viral videos aren’t something you can make! You can only beg for them to happen. The term defines not the content, but rather how its spreads. Here’s the point: your video will only be viral if it connects with people in truly relevant and meaningful ways. Just start focusing on producing content that people can truly relate to and one day, your stuff will maybe go viral. Until then, take Faris Yakob’s (chief innovation officer at MDC partners) advice and stop using the term. Few people have expressed this idea more clearly than he has. So here you are. In Faris’s own words:

“Let’s all agree to stop using the word viral. It’s an unhelpful metaphor that is confusing us. Viral is a thing that happens, not a thing that is. There is no such thing as “a viral.” The metaphor suggests something is self-propagating, when what we actually mean is that lots of people are choosing to spread it around, for their own reasons. Focusing on what those reasons are is going to be a lot more helpful.” - Faris Yakob (@Faris)

Some of my favorites (featured below) include: Dulux’s let’s colour project which I blogged about a while back (produced by Euro RSCG) as well as Chrysler’s Born of Fire (by Wieden+ Kennedy). I encourage you to check to other ones out as well. Enjoy!