Quote / Extrapolation

If “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic”, then we can assume science is the process through which magic becomes technology / technique.

Similarly, if “the future is here, it’s just unevenly distributed”, we can assume that immigration is often a form of time travel.  Stating it this way is probably horribly offensive and condescending, but there’s a ring of truth, there.

[I’m fairly certain these are Arthur C. Clarke and William Gibson quotes, respectively.  But the idea has stuck in my head longer than the attribution.]

Location Based Websites.

Location based applications are great.  I’m a huge fan.  The idea of connecting physical action to online communication speaks to me both as someone whose personal life is immersed in digital, and as a marketer who spends a significant chunk of every day looking for new and innovative ways to facilitate connecting with people through digital technologies.

[This may be why my job title is ‘Digital Facilitator’.  Alternately, it could have nothing to do with it.]

I’ve been thinking about the Nintendo DS launch, lately.  Not the slim sexy version of a few years back, or the DSi with cameras built in, or the upcoming 3DS (aka virtual boy 2.0), but the initial silver, oversized, somewhat awkward DS.  I bought one the first week it was available, because I 1) trusted nintendo to do something interesting, and 2) was excited about the potential of a touch screen as an input / control device.

It should not be surprising I own an iPhone and an iPad.

When the DS launched initially, Nintendo took advantage of it’s WiFi capabilities, creating demo games that could be downloaded only through specific locations (usually kiosks at gaming retailers, or on the convention floor).  This is a different kind of location based messaging, essentially incentivizing one specific locale, rather than incentivizing the action of checking in at a location at all (i.e., the Foursquare model).

Why not build a mobile website that exists solely on a location specific WiFi hotspot? Create content relevant to the location, information that is most valuable there, and offers that are tailored to the geography, and audience.

And then leave it locked to that one wireless network.

I’d leave the network open to access other sites, after stopping at the key location based content, just because encouraging people to stay around a hotspot, and providing utility, doesn’t really have a downside.

But for all the talk of driving traffic in-store, LBM (in my mind) focuses on a different goal - adding a branded and interactive layer to existing behaviour.  An LBW gives you a reason to visit, to stay, and to explore - as well as taking content to another level of specialization, and interaction.

Most importantly, it gives you something to talk about, an experience that requires more than loading an application to create.  If the content, and the design, are effective enough, this is an experience worth introducing other people to.

Creating artificial scarcity is a meaningful way of creating experiential value.  If you don’t believe me, research the diamond cartels.

Reminding Myself: Panopticon

Out of curiosity, would anyone be interested in a longer, in depth exploration of the “democratized panopticon” concept I haphazardly mentioned in my last post?

In this case, interested means “I’m going to do it no matter what, but would appreciate people to bounce ideas off of / discuss with, outside of my standard (and beloved and trusted) usual circle”.

Current thought is to start with the initial Panopticon concept, and then talk about technology reshaping it, how society has adapted, a few specific examples, and what it means for key elements of present (and future) human identity and interaction.

I needed a new project anyway.

Deliberate Accountability: an idea.

Imagine a brand had an online help desk. Not just a phone number, or an email address, but an actual online help desk, where you could see the person who was about to help you, on skype-esque streaming video.

You click through, and are assigned to a person who can see you, a person you can see. You are having a genuine, real time, one on one interaction with a person who has publicly, and individually pledged to help you.

This would be expensive. It would be complex. You’d need to empower your staff to make replacement and repair decisions, in person, without a flowchart. You’d run the risk of a screengrab every time an employee absentmindedly picked their nose, and a YouTube video every time they misrepresented the brand.

It would be completely worth it.

Because you already risk the bad press with every potential interaction. Because we live in a democratized panopticon: we are all (potentially) on video, all of the time.

Because he next phase of the Internet is about accountability. Not the ‘gotcha’ accountability enforced by wikileaks.org. The kind of accountability that comes with using your real name as a twitter handle, linking your LinkedIn profile with your Facebook page. The accountability that comes with WANTING to be googled.

The brands that get ahead of the accountability curve, and stop using potential risk as an excuse to avoid awesomeness, will develop a trust that is generally reserved for people.

Because embracing that accountability is about blowing up a company: from a whole to a collective of individual parts moving with unified purpose.

Show us your face, or we’ll assume you have something to hide.

Leveraging ‘Slacktivism’: Turn Content into Object.

Whether right or wrong, the physical still dominates the ephemeral in terms of creating impact.  One of the most interesting features of the rising voice that digital media is giving the average citizen is that the influential value of something physical seems to remain constant, whereas every additional voice seems to only reduce the impact of an individual thought online.

The internet is fantastic for spreading thought, but not great at spreading action, until things are maniftested physically.

An area where this is supremely evident is politics.  While there is a vibrant and informed conversation online about nearly any political issue, actual phone calls and letters still hold more sway, even in much smaller amounts, than emails, blog posts, facebook groups or retweets.  The easier it is for someone to share an opinion, the less valued that opinion becomes - our society considers sacrifice and suffering key contributing factors to the validity of a request for change, even if the ‘sacrifice’ is printing something, putting it in an envelope, and mailing it to your Member of Parliament.

Luckily, bringing dissent from the digital to the physical is an automation problem.  Aggregation, printing, addressing, and mass mail deliveries.  Postage to elected officials is free in Canada.  If someone was so inclined, they could collect and screencap every tweet with a politically minded hashtag, print, fold, address and package.  If someone was so inclined, they could pick a topic, and then flood the office of the minister responsible with physical evidence of online opinion.

If a company was smart, connected, and inclined, they could sponsor the operating costs of this, and put together a little video explaining the project, the rationale behind it, and the potential impact.

This isn’t limited to companies that work in a field related to printing / reproduction, although a copier company sponsoring something like this, targeted at public opinion on copyright issues would be fantastic.  It would work for any company that has a brand and an audience that is aligned with a political issue.

This isn’t just taking advantage of a psychological failing that ranks things we can touch over things we can’t.  This is enabling activism without the friction that keeps people from changing things.

People like the guy who takes their talk, and turns it into action.

YouTube Hero.

[Sometimes I give away ideas, either because I cannot execute them alone, or because I think they are more valuable as inspiration for someone else.  Laziness may also be a factor.]

I’ve been fascinated with the use of game mechanics in Foursquare: the idea that you can incentivize real world social behaviours with a point system, acheivements that can be unlocked, and social reinforcement, is beautiful, and fits closely into the concepts that Jane McGonigal discussed in her TED talk.

The inherent problem I’ve had with this system is that it’s too easily gamed, and often limited.  I’ve had friends check in at places they’ve driven by, and called people expecting them to be at home, only to find out they’re still on the highway.

Hence: YouTube Hero.

The idea is based on setting up a system of acheivements, point totals, and awards, based on the difficulty, location, and peer rating of your accomplishments - all of which is based on linking to video, either first person or taken by an observer / accomplice, of the player completing a task.  When a video is submitted, people watching the specific task, specific tags, or those who have added the user as a contact, get a notification of the submission, including a link to the video, and a yes / no option.  If X number of people vote yes, it counts.  You have your verification, and your points.

Obviously, this requires internet connected, video capable mobile devices.  I’m not sure how that’s a bad thing, but people always seem willing to suggest it is.

This also allows the achievements to be anything, from philanthropic (donate to a food bank) to utterly bizarre (set fire to a striped left sock) and any point in between.  While this could degrade into the absurd, it also incentivizes positive behaviours that people need a small extra push to complete (sign a petition, write a letter to your MP, etc) and encourages a transparency of action.

This is obviously the germ of an idea, as evidenced by the lack of a definitive ‘why?’, and less importantly, the use of a name that would be complete legal suicide.  Someone go have fun with it.