http://www.itnsource.com/aboutus/pressoffice/diagonalview.htm
http://corporate.itn.co.uk/about-itn/media-centre/press-release/itn-source-announces-diagonal-view-joint-venture.aspx
http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/news/itvs-cole-joins-itns-diagonal-view/5004078.article
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-190341457.html
http://www.ukaop.org.uk/events/ashaoberoi.html
http://www.itvmedia.co.uk/inside-itv/itv-news/ground-breaking-sales-contract-with-diagonal-view
http://www.abouttheimage.com/3960/itn_source_leveraging_online_video_with_diagonal_view_production_company/author2
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-190341457.html
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Thursday, December 17, 2009
2020 session 3: Matt Marsh. 17 December 09
Need to start with people's un met and poorly met needs. This is always the most important thing
Look at 'Shift Happens' example online. Blue sky thinking has gone from 10 years out to five years out to 2 years out. 10 year visions are now almost ridiculous due to the pace of change.
To really usefully think about 2020 you need to leave your own experiences and assumptions behind. 'Don't drink your own cool aid'.
Money used to be made out of the design fee for product designers. One project could last a year. Not any more. Much faster and cheaper industrial development processes. The old model represents too much of a punt today for a brand or a client. What this does do potentially though is level the playing field. Licensing deals are increasing as a result of this. In part, this comes back to designers now making money through services and licensing, not through product innovation.
Was the Philips UG prototyping service ahead of its time. Is this a bureau business model that could be revived and be successful.
Celebrity is the glue between the distribution platform and the business owner. There's a new rise in the power of celebrity.
Things have got much more commercially hard edged as there are more and more designers in the UK and globally. The point of difference is now more important.
The right mix of business and creative skills is essential to succeed and differentiate in this new world but to remain relevant. Again, the experience is critical. What is the new philosophy of Ravensbourne and what is its relevance? What is or can be different about the New Ravensbourne?
'How to partner' or 'how to form creative collaboration' should become a course of the future Ravensbourne.
New financing skills are essential is this rapidly changing digital, global economy.
We really need a collaborative start up company at Ravensbourne. A new RaveMedia should drive this forward.
Its too easy to make make make today both in media and content and product development. We need to encourage an attitude of 'stop and think more about less'.
The Ravensbourne experience needs to be about being creatively and technologically enabled but not about 100% becoming a fashion or a graphic or a broadcast graduate, necessarily. More and more design graduates in an increasingly democratised design world with fewer profitable business opportunities.
Are we about to enter a new phase of the rise of craft and personalisation of product, fashion and service?
With secondary and higher education arguably being dumbed down the need for Ravensbourne to attract a greater mix of future student through its brand and positioning is critical.
There is a need for a Ravensbourne Framework Model that addresses 'This is what the Ravensbourne Experience / Process looks like'.
It may be that some things need throwing out and starting again. Round shapes. Square holes?
Look at 'Shift Happens' example online. Blue sky thinking has gone from 10 years out to five years out to 2 years out. 10 year visions are now almost ridiculous due to the pace of change.
To really usefully think about 2020 you need to leave your own experiences and assumptions behind. 'Don't drink your own cool aid'.
Money used to be made out of the design fee for product designers. One project could last a year. Not any more. Much faster and cheaper industrial development processes. The old model represents too much of a punt today for a brand or a client. What this does do potentially though is level the playing field. Licensing deals are increasing as a result of this. In part, this comes back to designers now making money through services and licensing, not through product innovation.
Was the Philips UG prototyping service ahead of its time. Is this a bureau business model that could be revived and be successful.
Celebrity is the glue between the distribution platform and the business owner. There's a new rise in the power of celebrity.
Things have got much more commercially hard edged as there are more and more designers in the UK and globally. The point of difference is now more important.
The right mix of business and creative skills is essential to succeed and differentiate in this new world but to remain relevant. Again, the experience is critical. What is the new philosophy of Ravensbourne and what is its relevance? What is or can be different about the New Ravensbourne?
'How to partner' or 'how to form creative collaboration' should become a course of the future Ravensbourne.
New financing skills are essential is this rapidly changing digital, global economy.
We really need a collaborative start up company at Ravensbourne. A new RaveMedia should drive this forward.
Its too easy to make make make today both in media and content and product development. We need to encourage an attitude of 'stop and think more about less'.
The Ravensbourne experience needs to be about being creatively and technologically enabled but not about 100% becoming a fashion or a graphic or a broadcast graduate, necessarily. More and more design graduates in an increasingly democratised design world with fewer profitable business opportunities.
Are we about to enter a new phase of the rise of craft and personalisation of product, fashion and service?
With secondary and higher education arguably being dumbed down the need for Ravensbourne to attract a greater mix of future student through its brand and positioning is critical.
There is a need for a Ravensbourne Framework Model that addresses 'This is what the Ravensbourne Experience / Process looks like'.
It may be that some things need throwing out and starting again. Round shapes. Square holes?
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Ravensbourne 2020 - Education - Sue Thomas
The academics view of 2020:
Not about technology alone but how it is used. Boundaries between communities of practice will be impermeable. Brokerage and synergies between communities of practice will become more important.
Things are moving so fast we cant possibly imagine but teaching will certainly change and need to change. Students have to be equipped to work in a rapidly changing world with rapidly changing technologies.
Education in a faster and shallower world is a challenge. How do you have educational authority in such a world?
Robins dying out and sparrows increasing due to communication.
Educational challenges massive in 2020 due to Asia competition and demographic change. Spirit, culture and experience will be our own advantage in the west.
From mass production to mass configuration in 2020. Personalisation and localised supply of goods and artifacts.
Conserving the balance between technology and humanism is critical.
What happens to the long game in education in 2020. What's the impact on the student experience. How do people gain experience to become freelancers when they are not afforded the longer learning experience.
If students are less qualified now than they were ten years ago what will it be like in 2020? Where will the one to one, face to face experience come from?
We have an opportunity to start with a clean sheet and provide a distinctive digital experience.
Prof. Sue Thomas: www.suethomas.net
Bruce Sterling 'Shaping Things' Read this. Also the 'Internet of Things'.
MAKE and CRAFT websites run by O'Reilly - Tim O'Reilly. About traditions brought up to date.
Not about the book or the internet. It is about the coming together of both - 'Transliteracy'. Visual alternative could be 'Transvisuality'. Not one or the other but an 'ecology of literacy'.
Some are beginning to jump over the reading and writing process thanks to the improvements in technology and the internet. We don't all need to read and write. Some people need to fish...
A picture can be worth a thousand words. Writing is not an absolute truth, just a semblance of truth.
Howard Rheingold teaching in second life example.
Obama's Social Media Advantage. Best example of social media for business impact. At least 'personal business'
'It's not about wires. It's about people'
Deep attention is a real luxury and good for complex problem solving. It inhibits other abilities and hyper attention can be equally important to living.
Ronald Burt - 'Transliteracy in the network'. Some types don't go out the corporate network, others frequently go out and back in to share and often a will find b a disruption, others find him creative and desirable. Structural holes are vital to the health of the networks. Always loook for opportunities for new structural holes.
Where are our current transliteracy spaces and where will we create new ones in the future? Some people work well in such spaces others don't.
Many still find it easier and less time consuming to teach and prepare traditional learning experiences rather than digital learning experiences. This highlights the need to train the teaching staff else the student digital expectation and ability will quickly overtake.
There is a reluctance to embrace what is not known by the teaching generation.
Ravensbourne should become a focus for an anthropological study about new learners, new teachers and teaching techniques.
How do we remain ahead of the game and privde the space to develop new ideas and techniques? New merged teaching techniques combining the best of industry and Ravensbourne could become one of the focuses of a future lab model.
Continually shifting lab based research combining academics, community and businesses. Our thought leadership needs to responsive and fast paced. This is what Ravensbourne could do well. To make this work we need to cherry pick the right individuals to be involved. Librarians are key in this transliteracy process.
Creating the space and environment and head space to foster brokerage between people, communities and disciplines. We can do this through the lab space and EIC.
This is to be a key part of the remit of the future lab. 'Developing community, business and education futures through creativity and technology'.
The lab steering group to include learning enhancement, eic, ma, design and comms. One member from each.
Not about technology alone but how it is used. Boundaries between communities of practice will be impermeable. Brokerage and synergies between communities of practice will become more important.
Things are moving so fast we cant possibly imagine but teaching will certainly change and need to change. Students have to be equipped to work in a rapidly changing world with rapidly changing technologies.
Education in a faster and shallower world is a challenge. How do you have educational authority in such a world?
Robins dying out and sparrows increasing due to communication.
Educational challenges massive in 2020 due to Asia competition and demographic change. Spirit, culture and experience will be our own advantage in the west.
From mass production to mass configuration in 2020. Personalisation and localised supply of goods and artifacts.
Conserving the balance between technology and humanism is critical.
What happens to the long game in education in 2020. What's the impact on the student experience. How do people gain experience to become freelancers when they are not afforded the longer learning experience.
If students are less qualified now than they were ten years ago what will it be like in 2020? Where will the one to one, face to face experience come from?
We have an opportunity to start with a clean sheet and provide a distinctive digital experience.
Prof. Sue Thomas: www.suethomas.net
Bruce Sterling 'Shaping Things' Read this. Also the 'Internet of Things'.
MAKE and CRAFT websites run by O'Reilly - Tim O'Reilly. About traditions brought up to date.
Not about the book or the internet. It is about the coming together of both - 'Transliteracy'. Visual alternative could be 'Transvisuality'. Not one or the other but an 'ecology of literacy'.
Some are beginning to jump over the reading and writing process thanks to the improvements in technology and the internet. We don't all need to read and write. Some people need to fish...
A picture can be worth a thousand words. Writing is not an absolute truth, just a semblance of truth.
Howard Rheingold teaching in second life example.
Obama's Social Media Advantage. Best example of social media for business impact. At least 'personal business'
'It's not about wires. It's about people'
Deep attention is a real luxury and good for complex problem solving. It inhibits other abilities and hyper attention can be equally important to living.
Ronald Burt - 'Transliteracy in the network'. Some types don't go out the corporate network, others frequently go out and back in to share and often a will find b a disruption, others find him creative and desirable. Structural holes are vital to the health of the networks. Always loook for opportunities for new structural holes.
Where are our current transliteracy spaces and where will we create new ones in the future? Some people work well in such spaces others don't.
Many still find it easier and less time consuming to teach and prepare traditional learning experiences rather than digital learning experiences. This highlights the need to train the teaching staff else the student digital expectation and ability will quickly overtake.
There is a reluctance to embrace what is not known by the teaching generation.
Ravensbourne should become a focus for an anthropological study about new learners, new teachers and teaching techniques.
How do we remain ahead of the game and privde the space to develop new ideas and techniques? New merged teaching techniques combining the best of industry and Ravensbourne could become one of the focuses of a future lab model.
Continually shifting lab based research combining academics, community and businesses. Our thought leadership needs to responsive and fast paced. This is what Ravensbourne could do well. To make this work we need to cherry pick the right individuals to be involved. Librarians are key in this transliteracy process.
Creating the space and environment and head space to foster brokerage between people, communities and disciplines. We can do this through the lab space and EIC.
This is to be a key part of the remit of the future lab. 'Developing community, business and education futures through creativity and technology'.
The lab steering group to include learning enhancement, eic, ma, design and comms. One member from each.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
2020 technology session - Paolo Microsoft's digital view of 2020
START:
people's views of 2020:
technology will change and people will be left behind. people won't change the technology will
next generation are already working faster and multi-tasking quicker than our generations do. things have moved on so quickly and will continue to do so
my child was surfing the internet at 2 years. technology will set the scene for the way we learn even more so in the future
24-7 video access to the world in real time is imminent
2020 - flexibility and quickness will be key. more opportunity for global collaboration
very small steps of change will continue but greater opportunities to take risks
the speed at which people do things is 'just there' now. Nothing technological is onerous
will craft make a come back in light of techno babble?
our students define themselves dues to their specialisation - less of a process more about outcomes for future students
It's 11 years away!
Not all about technology. People drive the change in technology not the other way around
technology will become transparent
degrees of mobility
how will people make money through technology with everything getting easier and more accessible. the business models are quite quickly changing. Resource limitation a big issue
MICROSOFT FILM:
Danger of lack of direct people to people communication due to a reliance on technology and through technology
FURTHER THOUGHTS:
Have we really changed that much in the past 11 years? We shop more and consume more online but has it fundamentally changed the way we are?
democratisation of technology means more personalised expression and capability in production, education and business
divides will get bigger
services more important than product
less need to for travel more for collaboration
teaching, business and social models will all change massively
environmental
Paolo Barones perspective:
An evangelist, not a salesman. Visioning where the industry is going
No mouse and no keyboard - the removal of the middle interface. Simplifying the interface experience. That is the microsoft view.
Everything Microsoft visioned 5 years ago as blue sky is now possible.
We generally over estimate what is possible in next three years. Under estimate 5 years.
The ambition is to make the technology transparent. Why do we have internet 2.0 and enterprise 2.0 but not TV 2.0.
Finland and Spain will guarantee 1 megabit connection as basic human right by 2012. Fundamental to existence.
All content will be delivered through the network through separate plastic devices and discs.
Is 3D TV the TV 2.0 equivalent of web 2.0
The technology is creating more barriers to person to person communication not improving it
How many relationships can people humanly manage? There's a bit of psychological research to do in this area.
People actually want a passive experience. They don't want to interact. Some will and some won't.
The front room becomes an interactive not a passive space. Phsyical space will shrink. Can shrink as a result.
Its a generational thing. The young people will interact with TV programmes where we may not.
Teaching confidence and craft with technology is key to institutions like Ravensbourne. More than the level of competence held by the general public. You still need to have to understand the history and development of technology to plan where it can go.
Used to be about buying the product. That is about to change to the service. If it does then what people do with the technology will become much more important and meaningful.
Technology is still controled by inward looking wealthy small numbers.
What is the impact of us creating a never forgetting memory for all? Do societies and generations need to forget?
Web archaelogy will become a new discipline.
We are having a conversation today that our kids would find basic and simple.
People's creativity needs to be tuned to shape the technology of the future. Can people's inventiveness move faster than the technology?
Tutors still feel we are told what to do with with technology and not given the opportunity to make it and personalise it themselves. I disagree with this.
Freehand has disapeared and you can't use it any more. This is nonsense.
New technologies still need a solid craft teaching behind them.
No technology has to die today. You can emulate any old platform and software.
We are getting to a point where the technology is transparent and if this becomes totally successful the importance of craft will rise again. The need to be able to draw on screen.
It's not about technology or craft it's about the coming together of both.
There is good design and bad design. Good craft and bad craft.
The desire to finesse and perfect is at risk as a result of the democratisation of the technologies.
Line between producer and consumer has gone. I would argue that the line between avergae producer and professional producer has not gone. Programmes like Life exemplify this. As the barriers get higher so does the final quality. Vimeo os the other example of this.
As technology advances so should peoples demand for quality.
Is the quality of narative more important than ever. Production values worth less and less to the majority if consumers.
Students need to be taught the full range of tools for the job and their appropriateness to decide on the best tool and the best technology.
What's the cost of technological advancement for an institution like Ravensbourne? Waste, redundancy, initial financial cost. Cost to a student and cost to the institution. Rise of illegal software.
Will software producers release free software but take and IP stake in what is produced by its use among students.
Rave needs to demand a level 0 in technology. Basic entry skills in software. This selection criteria isn't yet applied.
We really need more technology evangelists at the institution.
If Ravensbourne stays as a traditional design school do you feel it will survive?
Personalisation and customisation of the student experience will be critical to the future success of Ravensbourne. The option to be remote or physical as desired by students is key.
There's traditional craft and there's digital craft.
Education models and business will change massively. UoP and curation potentials. What Ravensbourne is doing now will be done by most institutions in 10 years time. The technology will be hidden.
The importance of the Ravensbourne experience, the space, pull factor will become more important. Not less. Like live music renaissance today when you can access it for free.
Outcomes:
Opportunity for greater discussion across course leaders and courses at the college would be valuable. Use blog as a gathering point for good practice and thought development and leadership going forward within the college and with other institutions. Sally will set up human opportunities to do this too.
The bigger issues are not about digital at Ravensbourne.
One digital size does not fit all courses and all issues across them.
Will be interesting to do this discussion again after we've relocated when people are over the nervousness of relocation.
people's views of 2020:
technology will change and people will be left behind. people won't change the technology will
next generation are already working faster and multi-tasking quicker than our generations do. things have moved on so quickly and will continue to do so
my child was surfing the internet at 2 years. technology will set the scene for the way we learn even more so in the future
24-7 video access to the world in real time is imminent
2020 - flexibility and quickness will be key. more opportunity for global collaboration
very small steps of change will continue but greater opportunities to take risks
the speed at which people do things is 'just there' now. Nothing technological is onerous
will craft make a come back in light of techno babble?
our students define themselves dues to their specialisation - less of a process more about outcomes for future students
It's 11 years away!
Not all about technology. People drive the change in technology not the other way around
technology will become transparent
degrees of mobility
how will people make money through technology with everything getting easier and more accessible. the business models are quite quickly changing. Resource limitation a big issue
MICROSOFT FILM:
Danger of lack of direct people to people communication due to a reliance on technology and through technology
FURTHER THOUGHTS:
Have we really changed that much in the past 11 years? We shop more and consume more online but has it fundamentally changed the way we are?
democratisation of technology means more personalised expression and capability in production, education and business
divides will get bigger
services more important than product
less need to for travel more for collaboration
teaching, business and social models will all change massively
environmental
Paolo Barones perspective:
An evangelist, not a salesman. Visioning where the industry is going
No mouse and no keyboard - the removal of the middle interface. Simplifying the interface experience. That is the microsoft view.
Everything Microsoft visioned 5 years ago as blue sky is now possible.
We generally over estimate what is possible in next three years. Under estimate 5 years.
The ambition is to make the technology transparent. Why do we have internet 2.0 and enterprise 2.0 but not TV 2.0.
Finland and Spain will guarantee 1 megabit connection as basic human right by 2012. Fundamental to existence.
All content will be delivered through the network through separate plastic devices and discs.
Is 3D TV the TV 2.0 equivalent of web 2.0
The technology is creating more barriers to person to person communication not improving it
How many relationships can people humanly manage? There's a bit of psychological research to do in this area.
People actually want a passive experience. They don't want to interact. Some will and some won't.
The front room becomes an interactive not a passive space. Phsyical space will shrink. Can shrink as a result.
Its a generational thing. The young people will interact with TV programmes where we may not.
Teaching confidence and craft with technology is key to institutions like Ravensbourne. More than the level of competence held by the general public. You still need to have to understand the history and development of technology to plan where it can go.
Used to be about buying the product. That is about to change to the service. If it does then what people do with the technology will become much more important and meaningful.
Technology is still controled by inward looking wealthy small numbers.
What is the impact of us creating a never forgetting memory for all? Do societies and generations need to forget?
Web archaelogy will become a new discipline.
We are having a conversation today that our kids would find basic and simple.
People's creativity needs to be tuned to shape the technology of the future. Can people's inventiveness move faster than the technology?
Tutors still feel we are told what to do with with technology and not given the opportunity to make it and personalise it themselves. I disagree with this.
Freehand has disapeared and you can't use it any more. This is nonsense.
New technologies still need a solid craft teaching behind them.
No technology has to die today. You can emulate any old platform and software.
We are getting to a point where the technology is transparent and if this becomes totally successful the importance of craft will rise again. The need to be able to draw on screen.
It's not about technology or craft it's about the coming together of both.
There is good design and bad design. Good craft and bad craft.
The desire to finesse and perfect is at risk as a result of the democratisation of the technologies.
Line between producer and consumer has gone. I would argue that the line between avergae producer and professional producer has not gone. Programmes like Life exemplify this. As the barriers get higher so does the final quality. Vimeo os the other example of this.
As technology advances so should peoples demand for quality.
Is the quality of narative more important than ever. Production values worth less and less to the majority if consumers.
Students need to be taught the full range of tools for the job and their appropriateness to decide on the best tool and the best technology.
What's the cost of technological advancement for an institution like Ravensbourne? Waste, redundancy, initial financial cost. Cost to a student and cost to the institution. Rise of illegal software.
Will software producers release free software but take and IP stake in what is produced by its use among students.
Rave needs to demand a level 0 in technology. Basic entry skills in software. This selection criteria isn't yet applied.
We really need more technology evangelists at the institution.
If Ravensbourne stays as a traditional design school do you feel it will survive?
Personalisation and customisation of the student experience will be critical to the future success of Ravensbourne. The option to be remote or physical as desired by students is key.
There's traditional craft and there's digital craft.
Education models and business will change massively. UoP and curation potentials. What Ravensbourne is doing now will be done by most institutions in 10 years time. The technology will be hidden.
The importance of the Ravensbourne experience, the space, pull factor will become more important. Not less. Like live music renaissance today when you can access it for free.
Outcomes:
Opportunity for greater discussion across course leaders and courses at the college would be valuable. Use blog as a gathering point for good practice and thought development and leadership going forward within the college and with other institutions. Sally will set up human opportunities to do this too.
The bigger issues are not about digital at Ravensbourne.
One digital size does not fit all courses and all issues across them.
Will be interesting to do this discussion again after we've relocated when people are over the nervousness of relocation.
Monday, December 14, 2009
design sector research
http://www.designweek.co.uk/number-of-uk-designers-increases-by-a-quarter/3007641.article
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Biz Stone in London
Great thinking and content from the session at NESTA this morning. Reviewed in part here by the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8368750.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8368750.stm
Monday, October 26, 2009
what the papers say
OK. It's the Evening Standard, which barely counts anymore but it adds credence to my initial argument that social media = more noise than good business:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23760596-workers-tweet-away-pound-325m-of-time-in-the-office.do
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23760596-workers-tweet-away-pound-325m-of-time-in-the-office.do
thought for the day
Love this from Clay Shirkey:
"IT doesn't typically help to forge new acquaintances; it mostly helps to commnicate with existing one's".
This should be applied to all business strategy in relation to their use of social media platforms. They should not rely on it or expect it to deliver new business and new customers. It can however be used as part of the mix to help communicate and strengthen relationships with old and established customers.
Good background research to this quote found here - http://arxiv.org/abs/0906.3202
"IT doesn't typically help to forge new acquaintances; it mostly helps to commnicate with existing one's".
This should be applied to all business strategy in relation to their use of social media platforms. They should not rely on it or expect it to deliver new business and new customers. It can however be used as part of the mix to help communicate and strengthen relationships with old and established customers.
Good background research to this quote found here - http://arxiv.org/abs/0906.3202
Sunday, October 25, 2009
thought for the day 2
Love this quote too from a random Tweet somewhere.
"We progress from being consumers to creators through the rise of social media" That's great then. "why bother reading anymore when we can all just write?!"
"We progress from being consumers to creators through the rise of social media" That's great then. "why bother reading anymore when we can all just write?!"
social media aggregator - comment technologies
A peer pointed me in the direction of this tool for aggregating all your social media conversations. Will assess the impact I think it could have on different lines of business.
http://www.commenttechnologies.com/
http://www.commenttechnologies.com/
what the papers say 4
Interesting article on the history and growth of the internet. Particularly struck by all the bravado from the those claiming responsibility back in 1969 for its creation, but, as a few bloggers have correctly pointed out, despite all this talk of how fundamentally the internet has changed our lives in just 40 years (quit a long time in innovation terms actually) the majority of us still go to work, drive cars, physically go to school or university, watch tv etc. Hardly fundamental change then!
Maybe, that change is now coming. As a result of social media and the semantic web? We will see.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/23/internet-40-history-arpanet
Maybe, that change is now coming. As a result of social media and the semantic web? We will see.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/23/internet-40-history-arpanet
thought for the day
Can't help thinking these feelings about Google's business model echo the initial thoughts about social media that I kicked this research off with. Ultimately, social media tools support malfunctioning business models and encourage 'loose relationships' between all businesses and their customers.
The The Guardian online 23 October 2009:
The The Guardian online 23 October 2009:
"
Murdoch himself has said he wants to bring in paywalls to fix the media's "malfunctioning" business model, while former Times editor Robert Thomson – now running the Wall Street Journal – has lashed out at Google on several occasions for what he says is a parasitic attitude towards mainstream media.
Yesterday, Thomson repeated his attacks - telling Google vice president Marissa Meyer that she encouraged a loose relationship between media companies and consumers.
"Marissa unintentionally encourages promiscuity," he said. "The whole Google model is based on digital disloyalty – about disloyalty to creators."
"
Word of the day
Love this picked up by clay Shirkey:
"technochondria"=fear of new technology, term from Nick Bilton, NYTimes designer/futurist.
"technochondria"=fear of new technology, term from Nick Bilton, NYTimes designer/futurist.
what the papers say 3
More hints that soon the taps of free online content will be turned off. Don't say I didn't warn you.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/23/television-television
Drive all the kids online with free everything then slowly but surely push up the prices. It's inevitable.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/23/television-television
Drive all the kids online with free everything then slowly but surely push up the prices. It's inevitable.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
insightful research
A great source of US statisitcs revealing different sector uses of blogging and social media, the rising and falling trends and predictions for the future.
http://technorati.com/blogging/article/day-5-twitter-global-impact-and/
http://technorati.com/blogging/article/day-5-twitter-global-impact-and/
aggregators are the way forward
http://mashable.com/2007/07/17/social-network-aggregators/
people share my concerns. Can a truly effective aggregator pave the way forward?
people share my concerns. Can a truly effective aggregator pave the way forward?
Sunday, October 18, 2009
thought for the day. I must challenge him to a blog duel
http://www.originalanalogmachine.com/2008/08/20/why-twitter-will-win-big-in-the-social-media-sweepstakes/
Have I just lost the argument against SM?
http://www.chrisbrogan.com/50-ideas-on-using-twitter-for-business/
I'll experiment by applying the above rules to some business areas for a set period and review before and after sales and comparisons with non-tweeted business areas. Can I get research funding for this?
I'll experiment by applying the above rules to some business areas for a set period and review before and after sales and comparisons with non-tweeted business areas. Can I get research funding for this?
Some case studies
twitter:
Dell Outlet - offering limited new deals through twitter to its followers.
Is this really building new business or just replacing old email marketing techniques and direct mail?
Jetblue Airways - building a personal brand through asking customers what they want and providing updates on service changes to travelers while they are traveling.
It takes a significant amount of staff resource to provide this service. Is its impact on sales and profitability really measurable?
Teusnerwine - this is deemed a good case study for business use of Twitter but the brand owner him self proclaims 'this is not about trying to sell your product, but more building relationships with customers and potential customers."
The above sums it up well: Twitter and its like provide another tool to be used in the marketing and communications mix. Alone they are not good sales or business tools. You need to thin carefully about how to integrate them with your brand and business activity and to do this well takes considerable staff resource. Each case will be different and in some cases it may be worth the investment. In many cases such investment would not be justified.
What I will go on to do is draw up the ways in which twitter et al can be used to drive forward certain types of business activity related to Ravensbourne programmes and activities.
The Current TV example pasted below provides a good example of the future integration of TV with online and social media using simple ideas and simple coding:
Dell Outlet - offering limited new deals through twitter to its followers.
Is this really building new business or just replacing old email marketing techniques and direct mail?
Jetblue Airways - building a personal brand through asking customers what they want and providing updates on service changes to travelers while they are traveling.
It takes a significant amount of staff resource to provide this service. Is its impact on sales and profitability really measurable?
Teusnerwine - this is deemed a good case study for business use of Twitter but the brand owner him self proclaims 'this is not about trying to sell your product, but more building relationships with customers and potential customers."
The above sums it up well: Twitter and its like provide another tool to be used in the marketing and communications mix. Alone they are not good sales or business tools. You need to thin carefully about how to integrate them with your brand and business activity and to do this well takes considerable staff resource. Each case will be different and in some cases it may be worth the investment. In many cases such investment would not be justified.
What I will go on to do is draw up the ways in which twitter et al can be used to drive forward certain types of business activity related to Ravensbourne programmes and activities.
The Current TV example pasted below provides a good example of the future integration of TV with online and social media using simple ideas and simple coding:
Power to the people
Some examples of social media sites of benefit to the individual user, surfer, customer and business owner:
www.stumbleupon.com/
http://delicious.com/
http://www.flickr.com/
More for business:
http://digg.com/
http://www.reddit.com/
http://www.blogpulse.com/conversation
http://www.boardtracker.com/
www.stumbleupon.com/
http://delicious.com/
http://www.flickr.com/
More for business:
http://digg.com/
http://www.reddit.com/
http://www.blogpulse.com/conversation
http://www.boardtracker.com/
PREDICTION
The next wave of social media site: The next Twitter if you like! Will take direct information from your mobile phone without the need for you to even input in or make a Tweet or a post. It will report what you have purchased, what you have eaten, how active you've been, how long you slept, where you slept and what other and who's devises you were close to. Taken on a daily basis this information will be fairly bland and dull but collated over a number of months and years it would begin to tell some pretty interesting individual stories for individuals, for families, for corporations, for communities and for nations. Very interesting social and commercial opportunities begin to emerge from the above and companies should begin to structure themselves now to be ready for this next level of information they will imminently have available to them.
Questions: Who will own this information? What new legislation will be required to limit its flow? Is such information private or public if it is voluntarily reported? Should there be age restrictions on reporting and accessing such information?
Questions: Who will own this information? What new legislation will be required to limit its flow? Is such information private or public if it is voluntarily reported? Should there be age restrictions on reporting and accessing such information?
Content curation. Not content creation.
After the BTSR event I went back to 01zero-one to host a session delivered by Adrian Shaugnessy for level 3 graphic design students about how to start-up creative businesses.We discussed the opportunities which exist today in creating profit and opportunity from content curation over content creation and I would argue that this is where a lot of value is to be garnered from social media technologies and platforms. Today we live in an 'age of search' and the easier social networking tools and sites make ot for people to log and report their experiences and thoughts the greater the power of collective search can become.
This is the age of the content curator and not the age of the content creator.
If businesses can begin to curate information about their audiences behaviours, dreams, desires and predict their next moves through what they report and post on social networkign sites they will begin to be able to monetise this information. Arguably this will be done through them employing digital sociologists, anthropologists and psychologists to begin to analyse and report on what is happening in their digital territories. Social media sites will increasingly be designed with the above in mind and it will be these which go on to make millions in the future by delivering really valuable information to their business audiences. You may argue that Google, Twitter and Facebook were actually designed to achieve the above from the start. I would question this assumption.
This is the age of the content curator and not the age of the content creator.
If businesses can begin to curate information about their audiences behaviours, dreams, desires and predict their next moves through what they report and post on social networkign sites they will begin to be able to monetise this information. Arguably this will be done through them employing digital sociologists, anthropologists and psychologists to begin to analyse and report on what is happening in their digital territories. Social media sites will increasingly be designed with the above in mind and it will be these which go on to make millions in the future by delivering really valuable information to their business audiences. You may argue that Google, Twitter and Facebook were actually designed to achieve the above from the start. I would question this assumption.
more positive examples of social media for business
This week I spoke at the annual BTSR conference about how to improve profitability in the TV production business. I teamed up with Rick Williams of AKQA to spell out to a select group of broadcasters how they could / should begin to explore more than the making of just TV shows to remain relevant and profitable in the future.
Rick excellently put forward examples of AKQA content that are never intended for TV but will probably attract much larger audiences being pushed through the iPhone Applications and websites. Examples included Nike and BMW who between them have filmed hundreds of hours of content for online and mobile consumption. The content is potentially limitless being rolled out as the receiver wishes to consume it or through a series of ARG experiences tied into live events and TV ads. The conclusion of the presentation and ensuing discussion was that TV content as a stand alone entity has pretty much had its day. That is not to say that TV will not continue to be watched by millions but that to be successful and profitable it must have strong tie ins to services and extensions that consumers can access and interact with online and on their mobile devices. Those companies that do not diversify their content offerings into these areas will cease to exist and their content become less and less accessible and valuable. What we didn't explore in this session is how we then go on to monetise this mobile and online content beyond the initial payment of the brand owner in commissioning large amounts of it. In the case of Nike they commisioned in the region of 50,000 pounds worth of content for an iPhone application, which would have cost several hunded thousand pounds for the same number of hours to be used in a similar fashion for a TV production.
Rick excellently put forward examples of AKQA content that are never intended for TV but will probably attract much larger audiences being pushed through the iPhone Applications and websites. Examples included Nike and BMW who between them have filmed hundreds of hours of content for online and mobile consumption. The content is potentially limitless being rolled out as the receiver wishes to consume it or through a series of ARG experiences tied into live events and TV ads. The conclusion of the presentation and ensuing discussion was that TV content as a stand alone entity has pretty much had its day. That is not to say that TV will not continue to be watched by millions but that to be successful and profitable it must have strong tie ins to services and extensions that consumers can access and interact with online and on their mobile devices. Those companies that do not diversify their content offerings into these areas will cease to exist and their content become less and less accessible and valuable. What we didn't explore in this session is how we then go on to monetise this mobile and online content beyond the initial payment of the brand owner in commissioning large amounts of it. In the case of Nike they commisioned in the region of 50,000 pounds worth of content for an iPhone application, which would have cost several hunded thousand pounds for the same number of hours to be used in a similar fashion for a TV production.
19 oct 2009 update
The end of an interesting week of conversations, speaking events and research. The week began reading the news that Twitter will soon be carrying video content. Great for fun and creating even more online noise but will it offer any real business benefits?
The other pertinent Twitter news of the week includes the revelation that Sarah Brown's following of 840,000 is five time bigger than the entire Labour membership and that although the social networking site is yet to turn a profit or even outline how it ever intends to do so it is valued at a cool 630 Million Pounds.
Best Twitter uses of the week include Private Eye reporting from inside the commons about the gagging order attempted to be placed on The Guardian by dodgy oil firms and their lawyers and the mass mobilisation of disgust at a Daily Mail columnists far right rantings about Steven Gately's death being linked to his 'non-Christian' ways. Bother led to great outcomes for decency and illustrated the power of social networking for lobbying purposes. But neither illustrate positive business application.
The other pertinent Twitter news of the week includes the revelation that Sarah Brown's following of 840,000 is five time bigger than the entire Labour membership and that although the social networking site is yet to turn a profit or even outline how it ever intends to do so it is valued at a cool 630 Million Pounds.
Best Twitter uses of the week include Private Eye reporting from inside the commons about the gagging order attempted to be placed on The Guardian by dodgy oil firms and their lawyers and the mass mobilisation of disgust at a Daily Mail columnists far right rantings about Steven Gately's death being linked to his 'non-Christian' ways. Bother led to great outcomes for decency and illustrated the power of social networking for lobbying purposes. But neither illustrate positive business application.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
failed business model 1
1. eBay buys Skype for $3.1 Billion
2. Last week eBay offloads what it can of Skype, after its value had been written down by $1.4 Billion.
A classic case of two dot.com and social media based business giants failing to monetise the technology.
Other failed web 2.0 deals =
News Corp has halfed the value of Myspace since it purchased it
AOL is looking to sell Bebo already
CBS has recently had to accept a significant write down in the value of Last.fm since it purchased it less than two years ago
Perhaps the worst of all - ITV sell Friends Reunited for $25 Million after buying it for $175 Million.
If these social media tools head real or even potential business benefits their values should be soaring as bandwidths improve phenomenally and the online population expands at an exponential rate. But instead they decrease at frightening speed. There can be three possible reasons:
1. the leaders of these web 2.0 businesses are incompetent
2. the users and potential users leaders of these SM tools fail to utilise them to full social or economic advantage and therefor are unwilling to pay for them
3. the value of these SM tools beyond simply speeding up communication and enabling more people to create more noise is seriously limited.
Of course there are other reasons and explanations and I am massively simplifying the arguments here but the above sets the bar well for now beginning to consider the positive and potential successful application by business of SM tools.
2. Last week eBay offloads what it can of Skype, after its value had been written down by $1.4 Billion.
A classic case of two dot.com and social media based business giants failing to monetise the technology.
Other failed web 2.0 deals =
News Corp has halfed the value of Myspace since it purchased it
AOL is looking to sell Bebo already
CBS has recently had to accept a significant write down in the value of Last.fm since it purchased it less than two years ago
Perhaps the worst of all - ITV sell Friends Reunited for $25 Million after buying it for $175 Million.
If these social media tools head real or even potential business benefits their values should be soaring as bandwidths improve phenomenally and the online population expands at an exponential rate. But instead they decrease at frightening speed. There can be three possible reasons:
1. the leaders of these web 2.0 businesses are incompetent
2. the users and potential users leaders of these SM tools fail to utilise them to full social or economic advantage and therefor are unwilling to pay for them
3. the value of these SM tools beyond simply speeding up communication and enabling more people to create more noise is seriously limited.
Of course there are other reasons and explanations and I am massively simplifying the arguments here but the above sets the bar well for now beginning to consider the positive and potential successful application by business of SM tools.
what the papers say 2
The Observer. 06.09.09 - ARE NEWSPAPERS TRAPPED IN A TIME WARP?
"Brand-building and display ads belong to TV and newspapers far more naturally"
"The web does some things well and some things indifferently. Otherwise, why all the millions it spends on promoting itself via TV advertising" -i,e, meerkat.com / confused.com / ebay.com.
Yes, why indeed?, I ask if its powers of communication, brand building and selling are so effective!!!
I begin to think that Social Media tools 'alone' are totally ineffective in terms of generating sales, profit and success. The deeper question is whether they are effective when successfully integrated into your brand, marketing and sales strategy?
Already it is evidenced that the cost of online advertising is falling and not rising.
UK research reveals that even among the under 25's when asked which advertising format has the most impact 75% respond TV. Only 12% say internet search advertising is within their top 3 types of ads responded to and only 8% say the same about banner ads.
"Brand-building and display ads belong to TV and newspapers far more naturally"
"The web does some things well and some things indifferently. Otherwise, why all the millions it spends on promoting itself via TV advertising" -i,e, meerkat.com / confused.com / ebay.com.
Yes, why indeed?, I ask if its powers of communication, brand building and selling are so effective!!!
I begin to think that Social Media tools 'alone' are totally ineffective in terms of generating sales, profit and success. The deeper question is whether they are effective when successfully integrated into your brand, marketing and sales strategy?
Already it is evidenced that the cost of online advertising is falling and not rising.
UK research reveals that even among the under 25's when asked which advertising format has the most impact 75% respond TV. Only 12% say internet search advertising is within their top 3 types of ads responded to and only 8% say the same about banner ads.
thought for the day
If the digital revolution and the social media tools which ride the crest of its wave are so valuable to business then why is the digital revolution in Britain having to be subsidised so significantly by proposed 'telephone taxes' and the possible top slicing of the BBC license fee? Mmmm the business case looks fragile.
what the papers say
The Guardian. 26.09.09 - SPOTIFY EXPANDS FOR SUBSCRIBERS
New business model proposes social media business sells equivalent of 300 CD's for $10 a month subscription.
A great example of a sound business model in the creative industries. I sound negative but actually I'm not. At least if Spotify pull this business model of they will be a good example of a successful subscription based digital media business and to date, successful online subscription business models are few and far between with most consumers still used to getting and expecting their online content for free.
The Guardian. 26.09.09 - TOUGH TIMES AHEAD FOR THE BBC
BBC income now outstrips all of its commercial rivals of ITV, Channel 4, BSKYB etc by more than $1 Billion.
Considering the phenomenal social media tools our broadcasting industries today have available to them, surely if these tools were capable of helping to grow business the commercial broadcasters should be more successful and profitable than ever as they can now reach many more billions of people with cheap and even 'free' technology and their business models are ultimately about communicating messages to mass audiences.
The Guardian. 03.10.09 - WILL THEY SPEND IT?
Great case study about the Financial Times launch of a new website called 'How to Spend It' aimed at marketing luxury brand messages and advertising to the very wealthy audiences of the FT. Effectively the FT are attempting to recreate the look, feel and business impact of a luxury magazine online utilising digital and social media tools. See www.HTSI.com.
The business model here is sound enough in that the FT is a world recognised brand but its magazine is difficult to access in all corners of the world. At the same time the luxury goods market remains buoyant, even in recession hit times. At the smae time technology and design are seen as equal partners to editorial content. The design partner here is the company Razorfish, a London-based digital media agency who have ridden out three recessions! Other key factors behind this busines model are the offer of free content "while the site builds critical mass'.
Linked to this article, Conde Naste, publishers of vogue.com seem to be ahead of the curve in relation to publishers going digital. Jamie Pallot, their editorial director of CD Digital says "publishers have to let go of any illusions a website can retain the hermetically sealed essence of a magazine." He suggests that online magazines can do well but only if they fully embrace the digital medium. 'They are two very different media and they get more different every day."
How to spend it is trailing 'Brand Hubs' through the new online offering. Viewers can click on an item and go through to extra information and images about that item.
The value of luxury advertising doubled on FT.com last year and advertisers are responding to the fact that they can measure their online advertising effectiveness and can also follow their customers. However, how they translate this into actual sales and profit is still to be seen.
It's clear that as online quality and band width improve luxury brands can better communicate their brnad values online as well as in luxury, glossy magazines. However, I love the following insight, which sums up some of the challenges of using social media tools for business success:
The internet brings the spectre of mass participation and the kind of mainstream popularity that fashionistas term the 'Burberry Effect'. However for luxury brands (and many others) it's about being seen int he right environment and the stature of what that environment says about your brand or product. "It's not about reach. If it were people would just advertise in the Sun" Samual-Camps, Universal McCann.
New business model proposes social media business sells equivalent of 300 CD's for $10 a month subscription.
A great example of a sound business model in the creative industries. I sound negative but actually I'm not. At least if Spotify pull this business model of they will be a good example of a successful subscription based digital media business and to date, successful online subscription business models are few and far between with most consumers still used to getting and expecting their online content for free.
The Guardian. 26.09.09 - TOUGH TIMES AHEAD FOR THE BBC
BBC income now outstrips all of its commercial rivals of ITV, Channel 4, BSKYB etc by more than $1 Billion.
Considering the phenomenal social media tools our broadcasting industries today have available to them, surely if these tools were capable of helping to grow business the commercial broadcasters should be more successful and profitable than ever as they can now reach many more billions of people with cheap and even 'free' technology and their business models are ultimately about communicating messages to mass audiences.
The Guardian. 03.10.09 - WILL THEY SPEND IT?
Great case study about the Financial Times launch of a new website called 'How to Spend It' aimed at marketing luxury brand messages and advertising to the very wealthy audiences of the FT. Effectively the FT are attempting to recreate the look, feel and business impact of a luxury magazine online utilising digital and social media tools. See www.HTSI.com.
The business model here is sound enough in that the FT is a world recognised brand but its magazine is difficult to access in all corners of the world. At the same time the luxury goods market remains buoyant, even in recession hit times. At the smae time technology and design are seen as equal partners to editorial content. The design partner here is the company Razorfish, a London-based digital media agency who have ridden out three recessions! Other key factors behind this busines model are the offer of free content "while the site builds critical mass'.
Linked to this article, Conde Naste, publishers of vogue.com seem to be ahead of the curve in relation to publishers going digital. Jamie Pallot, their editorial director of CD Digital says "publishers have to let go of any illusions a website can retain the hermetically sealed essence of a magazine." He suggests that online magazines can do well but only if they fully embrace the digital medium. 'They are two very different media and they get more different every day."
How to spend it is trailing 'Brand Hubs' through the new online offering. Viewers can click on an item and go through to extra information and images about that item.
The value of luxury advertising doubled on FT.com last year and advertisers are responding to the fact that they can measure their online advertising effectiveness and can also follow their customers. However, how they translate this into actual sales and profit is still to be seen.
It's clear that as online quality and band width improve luxury brands can better communicate their brnad values online as well as in luxury, glossy magazines. However, I love the following insight, which sums up some of the challenges of using social media tools for business success:
The internet brings the spectre of mass participation and the kind of mainstream popularity that fashionistas term the 'Burberry Effect'. However for luxury brands (and many others) it's about being seen int he right environment and the stature of what that environment says about your brand or product. "It's not about reach. If it were people would just advertise in the Sun" Samual-Camps, Universal McCann.
What do we mean by social media?
My initial, quickfire, non-researched definition would be "global, digitally-networked platforms/tools, which allow users in any place, at any time to share information, content and opinion with one another". High profile examples include Flikr, facebook, twitter, youtube and myspace. There are then non-branded, social media tools available to us all like blogs and forums, which allow us to share thoughts and comments with our own, open or closed followers and audiences.
Researched and classified definitions include:
'An umbrella term that defines the various activities that integrate technology, social interaction, and the construction of words and pictures' - www.anvilmediainc.com/search-engine-marketing-glossary.html
'Social media is content created by people using highly accessible and scalable publishing technologies'
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media
'Online technologies and practices that people use to share opinions, insights, experiences, and perspectives with each other'
www.tvb.org/multiplatform/Multiplatform_Glossary.aspx
'Social media are works of user-created video, audio, text or multimedia that are published and shared in a social environment, such as a blog, wiki or video hosting site'
www.capilanou.ca/help/active-cms/glossary.html
Whatever your chosen definition there are three essential elements of 'people', 'interaction' and 'technology'
Interestingly the only definition I found even mentioning the word 'business' was this one:
'Social Media is the collection of tools and online spaces available to help individuals and businesses to accelerate their information and communication needs. [Axel Schultze]'
communitymanagers.pbwiki.com/Glossary-and-Reference
This quote is interesting in that it describes the main business use of SM technology being for accelerating information and communication. Good business strategy often relies on limiting, slowing down or iteratively releasing the flow of information and product rather than simply speeding it up.
Researched and classified definitions include:
'An umbrella term that defines the various activities that integrate technology, social interaction, and the construction of words and pictures' - www.anvilmediainc.com/search-engine-marketing-glossary.html
'Social media is content created by people using highly accessible and scalable publishing technologies'
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media
'Online technologies and practices that people use to share opinions, insights, experiences, and perspectives with each other'
www.tvb.org/multiplatform/Multiplatform_Glossary.aspx
'Social media are works of user-created video, audio, text or multimedia that are published and shared in a social environment, such as a blog, wiki or video hosting site'
www.capilanou.ca/help/active-cms/glossary.html
Whatever your chosen definition there are three essential elements of 'people', 'interaction' and 'technology'
Interestingly the only definition I found even mentioning the word 'business' was this one:
'Social Media is the collection of tools and online spaces available to help individuals and businesses to accelerate their information and communication needs. [Axel Schultze]'
communitymanagers.pbwiki.com/Glossary-and-Reference
This quote is interesting in that it describes the main business use of SM technology being for accelerating information and communication. Good business strategy often relies on limiting, slowing down or iteratively releasing the flow of information and product rather than simply speeding it up.
To really get to grips with the debate I've decided to adopt an initial negative view towards social media technologies and their evidenced, positive impact on design, media and creativity based businesses.
I'm going to look at examples in three key sectors of:
Media content and distribution
Design (product) and innovation
Knowledge - spanning training and higher eduction
Beyond these sectors I will also consider the impact of social media tools on promoting and building bigger business, profit, brand awareness and loyalty through clear and obvious advertising and more subtle or hidden techniques.
The main reason for this initial negative stance is in response to the incessant stream of news reporting a lack of coherent business models and of evidence of profit generation by even the most high profile, global businesses in this new digitally connected age. However, by taking a negative stance I expect to uncover at least a handful of examples of good practice whereby social media tools and opportunities have been identified and exploited leading to business success. The crunch will be whether this transpires to be the exception or the norm.
Thoughts: Are social media tools actually damaging more businesses than they are helping by creating constant noise and confusion?
If the tools and platforms can be used effectively for business what are the simple rules of successful use and deployment?
I'm going to look at examples in three key sectors of:
Media content and distribution
Design (product) and innovation
Knowledge - spanning training and higher eduction
Beyond these sectors I will also consider the impact of social media tools on promoting and building bigger business, profit, brand awareness and loyalty through clear and obvious advertising and more subtle or hidden techniques.
The main reason for this initial negative stance is in response to the incessant stream of news reporting a lack of coherent business models and of evidence of profit generation by even the most high profile, global businesses in this new digitally connected age. However, by taking a negative stance I expect to uncover at least a handful of examples of good practice whereby social media tools and opportunities have been identified and exploited leading to business success. The crunch will be whether this transpires to be the exception or the norm.
Thoughts: Are social media tools actually damaging more businesses than they are helping by creating constant noise and confusion?
If the tools and platforms can be used effectively for business what are the simple rules of successful use and deployment?
Friday, October 2, 2009
tutoral 2 follow up
kick started some initial thinking into questionning the real value of social media to SME's, large corporations and sole traders in the design and media sectors. Do new and emerging tools really add value and enable increased profit potential or do they just create noise and distraction?
It's clear that social media tools are of high value of you're directly dealing in content, messaging and their distribution but what if your business is based on actual physical product, is there any value and if so what?
Time to look at rounding up a few case studies of where the tools have been used to clear effect and where they have not.
Also need to clearly define what we mean by 'social media'.
It's clear that social media tools are of high value of you're directly dealing in content, messaging and their distribution but what if your business is based on actual physical product, is there any value and if so what?
Time to look at rounding up a few case studies of where the tools have been used to clear effect and where they have not.
Also need to clearly define what we mean by 'social media'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)