Search is dead: Part 1
As I am not the average or even median user or web surfer, I need to take a few things into consideration when applying this logic to my day-to-day; Search is dead. Essentially, it is for me and several *insert large number with a lot of zeros* users, too. As people develop their Followers and Rich Reputations equate to an authenticated transparency based on mutual collaboration, more users will begin to migrate away from their computers. Never mind the users whom have never experienced this type of data-mining. People-engines, are real. People aren't really surfing the web unless they have received a recommendation from someone else. Very few mainstream users really browse. Despite the simplicity behind it all, browsing has even become obsolete in many ways. Hence, Delivery.
I know that mobile has been popular for this reason exclusively, but as a platform for communications, advertising, marketing, quackery and hucksterism, it slowly loses traction as a viable method for effective communications. In-fact, it makes those components obsolete entirely.
I have to ask myself this question every time I see something interesting or hear about something interesting from someone else; Why believe your testimony when I'll affirm it with 10 other people, almost instantly? Subsequently, giving a Search engine one last query about my newest question or curiosity.
These are basic functions for social interactivity in almost every offline environment. We're not really seeing the true effects of this online. As mobile becomes predominant and ubiquitous as software and hardware, I think we'll see a return to experiential marketing that delivers tailored creative and branded experiences that really translate better in the real world with augmented reality.
The downside of this; If users are spending less time online, if we're not contributing in some way ( share, learn, share more ), these methods will fail as well–delivery is dependent on aggregation or curation of information, harvesting and compiling and then serving information to users. Geo-targeting isn't enough. Without new data to compile and build against, you can't deliver anything truly relative. Social networks aren't enough, especially when most are encapsulated behind private pages. Some data is being pimped out, but you may not be aware of what that information is specifically.
Search is driven by the question. If you don't know what you're looking for, you don't know how to ask the right question. Which leaves Search dead in the contextual-water.
Timelines for these things are really more dependent on the introduction, adaption and then advancement of the technology being used. Most users and consumers won't even see these prototypes, let alone experience phasing of this technology into something for mass consumption.
So here is the inevitable truth that drives search, development and advancement of these technologies, the industry I work in and the future of your spending choices--we need to continually contribute and share the information we learn and gather.
Search is dead and Delivery wins, when we've stopped asking questions.
12.21.2009
Search is dead: Part 1
Sorta'
Let's openly welcome Delivery. I no longer need to sit in front of my computer in order to access the information I'm interested in. In fact, as I've mentioned here, it's starting to find it's way to me. Information I find useful and information I may not have ever had any exposure too, is finding it's audience. Contrastingly, the audience is discarding content, faster. If not forgetting it, entirely.
There are times when I need to learn something quickly, if not transmit or teach something as quickly to someone else, but I really have no need to spend the amount of time I previously did, in front of the computer. Sagacity plays a big part here, for all of us, everyday. Especially when deciding what to share and with whom to share it with. We've developed tailored mechanisms for our network. I'd be willing to bet that we even specifically seeded parts of our personal social networks in hopes that they respond or contribute something back. Something related, but not identical.
Which brings me to Delivery. Search is about 20% of my day. This really occurs when I need to reference something I've heard or recently learned. I generally need this query to be relevant and viable while the content itself, should be portable. When I say portable, I mean that I should be able to pass it on, reference it within my social network or through my social engagement technologies. Another 30% of may day is largely made up of pushing information that I feel is important or relevant, through to my network--my stream. This is not a Mainstream. This a brook or jetty, in some cases. The other 40% of my day is spent in a dark closet gently weeping with my head in my hands. JK
The remaining 40% of that time is referencing or prototyping the information I've harvested. Checking it, affirming it's validity and figuring out if it has practical applications to what I'm working on. Keep in mind, I'm pulling this data from my networks. I'm not Stumbling, Bing-a-linging, Googling, Asking or Yahooing--no. I'm counting on these loose, data-driven brooks to feed me the information I need. I reciprocate either through idle banter, link-swapping or simply reposting information that others have passed to me. Re-contributing is important. All social interaction requires a positive reaction. You take from the stream, you give back to the stream. Otherwise the stream becomes stale and stagnant, eventually no longer capable of supporting new life.
This has made email obsolete in many ways. I think we all saw this coming, two years ago. If you're a lurker or one of those people that snatch-n-grabs the info without attribution, that's okay, too. Transparency (and I don't mean the type where your Avatar makes it seem like you're a *real* person) will soon be adopted across most networks. Which network–no one knows. If you source--it, everyone in your network will know. And why shouldn't they?
Let's openly welcome Delivery. I no longer need to sit in front of my computer in order to access the information I'm interested in. In fact, as I've mentioned here, it's starting to find it's way to me. Information I find useful and information I may not have ever had any exposure too, is finding it's audience. Contrastingly, the audience is discarding content, faster. If not forgetting it, entirely.
There are times when I need to learn something quickly, if not transmit or teach something as quickly to someone else, but I really have no need to spend the amount of time I previously did, in front of the computer. Sagacity plays a big part here, for all of us, everyday. Especially when deciding what to share and with whom to share it with. We've developed tailored mechanisms for our network. I'd be willing to bet that we even specifically seeded parts of our personal social networks in hopes that they respond or contribute something back. Something related, but not identical.
Which brings me to Delivery. Search is about 20% of my day. This really occurs when I need to reference something I've heard or recently learned. I generally need this query to be relevant and viable while the content itself, should be portable. When I say portable, I mean that I should be able to pass it on, reference it within my social network or through my social engagement technologies. Another 30% of may day is largely made up of pushing information that I feel is important or relevant, through to my network--my stream. This is not a Mainstream. This a brook or jetty, in some cases. The other 40% of my day is spent in a dark closet gently weeping with my head in my hands. JK
The remaining 40% of that time is referencing or prototyping the information I've harvested. Checking it, affirming it's validity and figuring out if it has practical applications to what I'm working on. Keep in mind, I'm pulling this data from my networks. I'm not Stumbling, Bing-a-linging, Googling, Asking or Yahooing--no. I'm counting on these loose, data-driven brooks to feed me the information I need. I reciprocate either through idle banter, link-swapping or simply reposting information that others have passed to me. Re-contributing is important. All social interaction requires a positive reaction. You take from the stream, you give back to the stream. Otherwise the stream becomes stale and stagnant, eventually no longer capable of supporting new life.
This has made email obsolete in many ways. I think we all saw this coming, two years ago. If you're a lurker or one of those people that snatch-n-grabs the info without attribution, that's okay, too. Transparency (and I don't mean the type where your Avatar makes it seem like you're a *real* person) will soon be adopted across most networks. Which network–no one knows. If you source--it, everyone in your network will know. And why shouldn't they?
The Communication Art
An agency's objective in my opinion and when given the opportunity; is to clearly, uniquely and effectively communicate an idea, product or service in a relative context. In doing so, it is inherently dependent on appealing to the largest set of narrow-minded perspectives (yourself, myself and my parents). Never mind the complexities normally associated with niche markets and demographically specific communications associated with business-to-business. Call them consumers, prospects, users, prosumers–people. However you qualify your objectives, it comes down to appealing to a large number of narrowed-perspectives quickly and effectively.
Clients (the individuals gauging work, signing-off or approving strategy and creative) tend to believe they are the target. They are not. Clients generally want a new portrait painted for their company, but are hesitant to change the outfit they are wearing. The end result is often an iteration of what the competition has already done. This new portrait, accompanied by a bright red starburst, no longer denotes new.
With expanding media fragmentation and (generational-based) disassociation of brand and prospect, compounded with a small but emerging new media landscape, we're in need of new ideas, more than ever. I would even argue that it's cheaper for client's to explore and test new strategy and creative due to these new progressions.
It is the truly new idea that cannot be adequately described with words, not perfectly represented with an icon or photograph, not experienced ubiquitously when several people utilize the same interface.
This is new. This is what you, as a client, are paying for. As integrated as communication is today, it is within every client's best interest to explore what they have not done before. A client's idea is wasted when it's executed the same way their category is executing their ideas.
Clients (the individuals gauging work, signing-off or approving strategy and creative) tend to believe they are the target. They are not. Clients generally want a new portrait painted for their company, but are hesitant to change the outfit they are wearing. The end result is often an iteration of what the competition has already done. This new portrait, accompanied by a bright red starburst, no longer denotes new.
With expanding media fragmentation and (generational-based) disassociation of brand and prospect, compounded with a small but emerging new media landscape, we're in need of new ideas, more than ever. I would even argue that it's cheaper for client's to explore and test new strategy and creative due to these new progressions.
It is the truly new idea that cannot be adequately described with words, not perfectly represented with an icon or photograph, not experienced ubiquitously when several people utilize the same interface.
This is new. This is what you, as a client, are paying for. As integrated as communication is today, it is within every client's best interest to explore what they have not done before. A client's idea is wasted when it's executed the same way their category is executing their ideas.
12.11.2009
10 Tips for Viral Marketers From a Military Propaganda Manual
Jump to Adverlab for the original post.
1. Effective rumor design requires special kinds of intelligence on Rumor Targets.
2. The design of a rumor is largely determined by the job it has to do. The slogan-type rumor ("England will fight to the last Frenchman") is especially adapted to summarizing opinions which are already widely accepted. Narrative-type rumors, on the other hand, aim at introducing information which will create or shape new attitudes.
3. The successful propaganda rumor is self-propelling in a high degree, retains its original content with a minimum of distortion, and confirms to strategic requirements.
4. The form and content of a rumor should be tailor-made for the channel through which it is to be initiated. (The best type of rumor to be spread through diplomatic circles: clever epigrams.) Different channels of rumor initiation and dissemination frequently require different forms and contents for the rumor.
5. A successful rumor must take advantage of the state of mind of the people for whom it is intended.
6. The rumor should be sufficiently brief and simple to survive in memory of successive narrators.
7. The rumor's plot should recapitulate precedents and traditions in the history and folklore of the group.
8. A successful rumor is a function of the momentary interests and circumstances of the group. It provides justification for suppressed fears, hatreds, or desires.
9. Unless most subtly handled, counter-rumors may emphasize and increase the effectiveness of the rumor to be countered.
10. Design different rumors that reveal the same "information".
1. Effective rumor design requires special kinds of intelligence on Rumor Targets.
2. The design of a rumor is largely determined by the job it has to do. The slogan-type rumor ("England will fight to the last Frenchman") is especially adapted to summarizing opinions which are already widely accepted. Narrative-type rumors, on the other hand, aim at introducing information which will create or shape new attitudes.
3. The successful propaganda rumor is self-propelling in a high degree, retains its original content with a minimum of distortion, and confirms to strategic requirements.
4. The form and content of a rumor should be tailor-made for the channel through which it is to be initiated. (The best type of rumor to be spread through diplomatic circles: clever epigrams.) Different channels of rumor initiation and dissemination frequently require different forms and contents for the rumor.
5. A successful rumor must take advantage of the state of mind of the people for whom it is intended.
6. The rumor should be sufficiently brief and simple to survive in memory of successive narrators.
7. The rumor's plot should recapitulate precedents and traditions in the history and folklore of the group.
8. A successful rumor is a function of the momentary interests and circumstances of the group. It provides justification for suppressed fears, hatreds, or desires.
9. Unless most subtly handled, counter-rumors may emphasize and increase the effectiveness of the rumor to be countered.
10. Design different rumors that reveal the same "information".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Imagine a brand landscape defined by the individual; the consumer, the prospect, the common surveyor–a marketplace that evolves organically based on consumer interaction and feedback. A company and their agency-both accountable for their products, services and ideas. Knowledge is growing directly in relation to the amount of people contributing to it without regard for social or economical barriers. Language barriers don't exist. Knowledge is systematic growth based on interoperation without ration. Mass communications leveraged by the individual. Products and services rising and falling on their own merits. Someone googles "sucker born everyday," every minute. Advertising talks too much, art requires no explanation and we live in the middle. Create relevancy.
